Why did Apple Prostitute the iphone for huge mobile contract shares?

I

ishopukisfake

macrumors regular
Steve Jobs paraphrase - "So we are really excited, we're really excited about the new price we're going to be able to offer the iphone 3G, yes just $199 / £99 for the 8 gig model...

Apple WWDC zombie - "Woot woot, YEAH..........."

SJP - "Oh yes... and a 3 grand contract over 9 years with your local mobile network...."

Apple WWDC zombie - "YEAHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!"
 
to your second post: Why don't you go to the site and check?

To your first post: They pimped out the phone for money... duh.
 

I have an old imac G5, a black macbook, an ipod video and original ipod and recently bought a macbook pro 17 inch - Of course I really like apple products, and it just annoys me slightly how they haven't opened access to the iphone for people who don't want to get tied into lengthy contracts and don't use the phone enough to warrant £600 or $1200 mobile deals over a year.
Oh well, they seem to have seen sense and are supposedly selling the handset with pay as you go or "payg" before christmas.
 
ishopukisfake said:
Yes sorry I knew the answer to both questions, - AND I AGREE, answer to thread title, because they are too greedy
Click to expand...

OMG! yeah! They should be giving it out for free. Why would Apple charge so much for a luxury phone!?! WTF? I can getz a BB pUrl for leikz free from da vzw.


But seriously, I think they they should have left the phone unsubsidized, I liked it when the phone was a status symbol. Now anyone can get one! I wish it didn't become another iPod where now everyone will have one. Apple products are supposed to be luxuries.
 
Not for free obviously, I would be happy to pay £350 / $700 for the handset, its just the contracts I refuse to get involved with.
I'm actually thinking of buying a handset from new zealand for $800, - not exactly free, but at least your not paying vast amounts of money in a contract to huge mobile executive fatcats
 
ishopukisfake said:
Not for free obviously, I would be happy to pay £350 / $700 for the handset, its just the contracts I refuse to get involved with.
I'm actually thinking of buying a handset from new zealand for $800, - not exactly free, but at least your not paying vast amounts of money in a contract to huge mobile executive fatcats
Click to expand...

Apple is a business, with stakeholders. That is the answer to your question. Obviously they made the right call, considering that people are still lining up for them.
 
tuffluffjimmy said:
OMG! yeah! They should be giving it out for free. Why would Apple charge so much for a luxury phone!?! WTF? I can getz a BB pUrl for leikz free from da vzw.


But seriously, I think they they should have left the phone unsubsidized, I liked it when the phone was a status symbol. Now anyone can get one! I wish it didn't become another iPod where now everyone will have one. Apple products are supposed to be luxuries.
Click to expand...

so you're crying because a business wants to capitalize off the popularity of it's product. Omg everyone has an iphone. Mines isn't special anymore. That's some 2nd grade **** right there. Before it was subsidized I saw plenty of people with them. They were never status symbols. Just who was willing to buy an iphone symbols. I saw plenty of people who had no damn business with one with them. Just like with every hyped product. Your attitude is the reason I have to tell people no I'm not an Apple snob I just bought a Macbook because I wanted to try something new.
 
ishopukisfake said:
I have an old imac G5, a black macbook, an ipod video and original ipod and recently bought a macbook pro 17 inch -
Click to expand...

All right, we get it, you're loyal. It seems like everyone posting a rant these days has to prove their loyalty. It means nothing, really. A well-reasoned argument can be made just as much by a Microsoft zealot as an Apple fanboy. The same is true of unjustified ranting and trolling.

Anyway, Apple is certainly not hurting by making their decision. Considering the profit they make from each phone sold, I certainly wouldn't call it "prostituting." And if it makes them cash, why not? It's their product, they have every right to sell it the way they see fit. Those who find the terms unacceptable can buy any of the scores of other phone models out there, or get an iPod touch.
 
Why did Apple Prostitute the iphone for huge mobile contract shares?
Click to expand...
Because they are a business, not a charity. Prostitutes aren't exclusive by the way. Any Tom Dick & Harry with $20 can take advantage of their services.
 
scaredpoet said:
All right, we get it, you're loyal. It seems like everyone posting a rant these days has to prove their loyalty. It means nothing, really. A well-reasoned argument can be made just as much by a Microsoft zealot as an Apple fanboy. The same is true of unjustified ranting and trolling.

Anyway, Apple is certainly not hurting by making their decision. Considering the profit they make from each phone sold, I certainly wouldn't call it "prostituting." And if it makes them cash, why not? It's their product, they have every right to sell it the way they see fit. Those who find the terms unacceptable can buy any of the scores of other phone models out there, or get an iPod touch.
Click to expand...

It wasn't a rant I was just establishing that I am not just mindlessly bashing apple, I have bought allot of their products and do want to buy an iphone also, however that doesn't mean I can't see fault and error in what they are doing when I think they are making mistakes. (I know many diehards apple fanboys will defend anything they do)
In fact they would have sold many many more handsets if they has offered the product as pay as you go, so it isn't so much about this great ideal of shifting as many phones as possible as Jobs seems to be saying, but more about making as much money as possible, initially at least, from phone contracts. Thats what I mean about prostituting the product. They signed away certain rights of control for the right price, and consented in some form to limiting consumer choice, not to mention not even being able to buy one now through their own site.
 
Small White Car said:
You're not going to pay for a mobile contract?

Why get an iPhone at all??
Click to expand...

Without contract option means you buy the handset at a higher price, but are not bound into years of monthly payments by a mobile operator, you can use any sim card to run your phone and top up the credit when and as you need it. I think its much more convenient.
Apple have already implemented this in Italy and New Zealand and a few other countries and is about to hit the uk - I question why they didn't allow this option to begin with, they had multiple mobile operators vying for the contract and could have stipulated it with ease as a condition.
 
And why didn't they? Because they chose to sacrifice apple customer flexibility over making allot more money from large cuts of mobile contracts.
Yes ok I know it is a business with shareholders and most businesses have making as much money as possible as top priority, but to me it is disappointing that they did not offer customers the flexibility of both options, and are only doing it now, down the line.
 
ishopukisfake said:
Without contract option means you buy the handset at a higher price, but are not bound into years of monthly payments by a mobile operator
Click to expand...

I know WHAT it means. But you said you didn't want to give money to "mobile executive fatcats." That's the part I was asking about.

Apparently you don't actually have a problem giving them money like you said (since you'll still be paying them) you just want the option to quit at any time. That's fine, but that's not exactly what it sounded like the first time.
 
Small White Car said:
I know WHAT it means. But you said you didn't want to give money to "mobile executive fatcats." That's the part I was asking about.

Apparently you don't actually have a problem giving them money like you said (since you'll still be paying them) you just want the option to quit at any time. That's fine, but that's not exactly what it sounded like the first time.
Click to expand...

Well with pay as you go you aren't bound at all by contract, so there is no real leaving or quitting, as your not obligated to continue use at any point
 
ishopukisfake said:
Well with pay as you go you aren't bound at all by contract, so there is no real leaving or quitting, as your not obligated to continue use at any point
Click to expand...

I understand, I used to live the same way. I never signed a contract for a phone for the last 10 years. I spent more for the phones I bought and was happy to do it.

So I understand. This used to be me.

But I am absolutely certain that I won't be giving up my iPhone within the next two years, so this one doesn't bother me at all. It's a totally different situation, to me.
 
Yes, there are also advantages to contracts, you don't have to bother topping up the phone all the time. But to me, I don't use the phone much so it would be a waste of money to be paying out a certain amount each month way more than I need to use. I could afford to do it, but I can't justify it. Still it will be out here soon as pay as you go..
 
I also don't see why Maseratis aren't a bit more affordable, and the associated cost of ownership is much too high. Why don't they lower the price so everyone can have one?
 
ishopukisfake said:
Steve Jobs paraphrase - "So we are really excited, we're really excited about the new price we're going to be able to offer the iphone 3G, yes just $199 / £99 for the 8 gig model...

Apple WWDC zombie - "Woot woot, YEAH..........."

SJP - "Oh yes... and a 3 grand contract over 9 years with your local mobile network...."

Apple WWDC zombie - "YEAHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!"
Click to expand...


pretty much the same price I would pay with any COMPETENT mobile phone company for service, so I don't see your point at all.

A lot of people aren't forced to eat mac and cheese and ramen noodles either.
 
marksman said:
pretty much the same price I would pay with any COMPETENT mobile phone company for service, so I don't see your point at all.

A lot of people aren't forced to eat mac and cheese and ramen noodles either.
Click to expand...

Right? Besides the OPs wild exageration of a 9 year exclusive deal, the iPhone plans aren't out of line with the rest of AT&T's smart-phone plans, and is a premium device. When there ar tons of phones for free, and under $100, it's not like we're being forced here. Again, you can't bitch about premium pricing for a product you KNOW is going to be expensive.
 
It's not about affordability, its about consumer choice and flexibility - Apple have chosen to sign contracts prohibiting the pay as you go option which is the most popular and widely used form of mobile use here.
You pay far more actually for the handset alone.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Back
Top