So I'm stuck with T-Mobiles selection or for $1000 more over 2 years, AT&Ts selection. If I'm doing that I might as well spend the extra $600 and go with Verizon so that I can get a signal in my house too!
Posted from Nokia E7-00
xBrockSamson wrote:
T-Mobile is attracting me for the same reason. I can buy three unsubsidized phones for $600 each and with a family value plan be about $1000 cheaper (including phone costs!) than AT&T over the next two years and that's with MORE minutes (1000 vs 700) and no overages on 2GB of data. The ONLY drawback, and unfortunately it is huge, is that since T-Mobile uses a different frequency I'd basically be stuck with 2G speeds unless I got something which was compatible with 1700mhz and that eliminates most Euro phones and essentially removes the advantage of being able to pick my own phone in the first place
They may not have anything you would be interested in and of course there's also the pending change with Nokia/o/s to consider, but AFAIK some of the non-branded Nokias are the only devices with world wide 3G support, including both at&t and T-Mo for the U.S. (I'm really enjoying my new E7-00. 
)
xBrockSamson wrote:
Since we need service with or without a contract the ETF and contract are irrelevant. The issue is that even if you buy your phone outright you pay back $350 for a subsidy that you never received as part of your monthly bill. I was hoping that there was some sort unadvertised discount or lower price to compensate for the lack of subsidy but there doesn't appear to be and unfortunately prepaid is even more expensive than the family plan and doesn't offer any advantages over it. The only thing I can really think of is... hope that the iPhone 5 comes out and is expensive off-contract, buy 3 of those on-contract for $200, turn around and sell those on ebay for $50 less than off contract price and then use the money to buy the phones I wanted in the first place. Anyone want an iPhone 5 off contract? hehe
True - and many people do this to make buying a non-branded device of their choice more feasible. If you know you intend to use at&t's service for the next two years anyway, there's an argument to be made for gaming the system so that you can somewhat negate the impact of paying back an equipment subsidy to at&t for a phone they never subsidized to begin with.
If only the model we use in the US would move away from "equipment subsidies" and implement a discount for agreeing to a service contract instead.........
hme83 wrote:
(I'm really enjoying my new E7-00.
)Those E7s are very nice, aren't they? I really like the keyboard mechanism on them.
If the Nokia E7 was not a Symbian-powered phone and operated on Android instead, it would be among the top five choices for my next smartphone.
Remember that Wild Banchi... 1993-2010
Posted from Apple iPod Touch
Posted from Nokia E7-00
21stNow wrote:
hme83 wrote:
True - and many people do this to make buying a non-branded device of their choice more feasible. If you know you intend to use at&t's service for the next two years anyway, there's an argument to be made for gaming the system so that you can somewhat negate the impact of paying back an equipment subsidy to at&t for a phone they never subsidized to begin with.
If only the model we use in the US would move away from "equipment subsidies" and implement a discount for agreeing to a service contract instead.........
I agree with you except for the signing the contract to get a discount part. I want the "discount" for not having a subsidy without having a contract. T-Mobile's Value Plans are exactly what you are referring to. T-Mobile used to have an Even More Plus plan, which is what I preferred and what I have with T-Mobile.
Yes - that's why xBrockSamson was lamenting the general lack of availability of devices with both at&t and T-Mo 3G bands.
And while I'd love for the primary wireless carriers to eliminate the equipment subsidy system and offer a service discount instead, all without any long term contractual obligation, I just don't think that's very realistic thinking. lol. I'd at least consider signing a term agreement for a service discount.
Wild Banchi wrote:
hme83 wrote:
(I'm really enjoying my new E7-00.
Those E7s are very nice, aren't they? I really like the keyboard mechanism on them.
If the Nokia E7 was not a Symbian-powered phone and operated on Android instead, it would be among the top five choices for my next smartphone.
For me, the device manufacturer/hardware quality and functionality/features are far more important than the o/s really is.
My Nokias have all been work horses - they just feel good and are enjoyable to actually use day in and day out. I like some of the specific features of the other phones I use, but I always look forward to returning to my Nokias. I would probably choose a Nokia regardless of it's o/s simply due to the quality of the device. That said - I do wish Nokia had chosen Android for their future direction rather than WP7; but hopefully their marriage with MS will continue to result in a high quality device.
hme83 wrote:
21stNow wrote:
hme83 wrote:True - and many people do this to make buying a non-branded device of their choice more feasible. If you know you intend to use at&t's service for the next two years anyway, there's an argument to be made for gaming the system so that you can somewhat negate the impact of paying back an equipment subsidy to at&t for a phone they never subsidized to begin with.
If only the model we use in the US would move away from "equipment subsidies" and implement a discount for agreeing to a service contract instead.........
I agree with you except for the signing the contract to get a discount part. I want the "discount" for not having a subsidy without having a contract. T-Mobile's Value Plans are exactly what you are referring to. T-Mobile used to have an Even More Plus plan, which is what I preferred and what I have with T-Mobile.
Yes - that's why xBrockSamson was lamenting the general lack of availability of devices with both at&t and T-Mo 3G bands.
And while I'd love for the primary wireless carriers to eliminate the equipment subsidy system and offer a service discount instead, all without any long term contractual obligation, I just don't think that's very realistic thinking. lol. I'd at least consider signing a term agreement for a service discount.
Yes, it's too bad that it really doesn't work for T-Mobile, though. Either way, the plans weren't explained well. Even More Plus wasn't marketed that I can remember. The Value Plans have been marketed extensively, but not well. It has lead to a lot of customer confusion and anger. If a customer has a Classic Plan (or similar), which is the traditional subsidized phone contract, and wants to switch to the Value Plan, there can be up to a $200 migration fee. This makes customers mad.
If you have a chance, check out T-Mobile's forums to see the threads referring to the migration fee. Tmonews also had a post explaining the Value Plan sale that they had on Saturday. The mere fact that the post was so long (and the resulting comments) showed how confusing it is. Unfortunately, American customers are too accustomed to having a phone subsidy. Anything that requires paying full price for the phone is met with screams and cries.
I think one of the main issues is that many people (if not most) don't even know that their phones are subsidized. Even if they do they don't really understand how it works. A LOT of people just think that phones cost $200 and if you mention $600 they are shocked and have no idea what you are talking about. I'd love to see how shocked people would be if they realized that they are paying $15 per month per line for a phone subsidy, regardless of what phone they bought and if they have a contract or not. Oh well, I can dream
21stNow wrote:
Yes, it's too bad that it really doesn't work for T-Mobile, though. Either way, the plans weren't explained well. Even More Plus wasn't marketed that I can remember. The Value Plans have been marketed extensively, but not well. It has lead to a lot of customer confusion and anger. If a customer has a Classic Plan (or similar), which is the traditional subsidized phone contract, and wants to switch to the Value Plan, there can be up to a $200 migration fee. This makes customers mad.
If you have a chance, check out T-Mobile's forums to see the threads referring to the migration fee. Tmonews also had a post explaining the Value Plan sale that they had on Saturday. The mere fact that the post was so long (and the resulting comments) showed how confusing it is. Unfortunately, American customers are too accustomed to having a phone subsidy. Anything that requires paying full price for the phone is met with screams and cries.
Thank you, I'll have to check out the news post and comments. I've been meaning to visit the T-Mo forums anyway.
While there is a lot of pure "sticker shock" in those screams, the unfortunate thing is it is also to some degree a reflection of their true feelings re: the value equation - and that's masked with the equipment subsidy system we use. With non-disclosed equipment subsidies, consumers aren't able to readily make a fully informed choice for themselves re: which device to use based on it's price vs. it's expected worth, which ultimately hinders competition and technological advancement. And of course the same can be said re: the carrier service side of the business as well.
