Related
After reading all the stories, lots of comments on blogs and forums, I have had enough of the BS about how $530 is over priced and way too much and blah blah blah. You guys want the latest and greatest but aren't willing to pay any more than $5 for it.
Every single phone worth money for years has had an unsubsidized price of at least $550 with a few exceptions of course (G1 is only $400, but it is a generation old hardware). An iPhone 3GS 32gb retails for $699 straight up. The HTC HD2 is $899 on Amazon. Good phones aren't cheap as I am sure a lot of you know. So in this respect, $530 is actually a pretty good deal; especially when you compare it to the HD2 which has the same processor and similar hardware. You are getting a next-gen phone with the best screen to ever be on a phone, double the ram of most high end phones, and double the resolution of most high end phones. You expected the best of the best to be cheap? Pfft...
Also, my current T-Mobile plan is superior to what is going to be offered. It will be cheaper and easier in the long run to just buy the phone straight up.
What I am seeing from people is they see $530 and freak the hell out because they have the $180 to compare it against. Sure, there is a big difference there, but you are locked in to a contract for 2 years. $80 * 24 months + $180 = $2100 over 2 years! AND you only have 500 minutes. If you bought the phone straight up and went with Even More Plus for $80/mo, you get unlimited everything. $80 * 24 months + $530 = $2450. Yes, this is more expensive, HOWEVER, how many times will you go over your 500 minutes in the next 2 years? If this is not a problem for you, by all means, go right ahead and get the contract deal since it suits you. But for me, and I suspect most people, 500 minutes is not enough. For the additional $350 over 2 years, or $14.58 and change every month, it is worth having those unlimited minutes.
Does anybody else agree with me on this? All of my phone junkies I talk to agree that $530 is reasonable. Sure, we all would love a less expensive phone, but lets get real here...
Oh, and if this "leak" turns out to be false, than what an awesome waste of time and all of this is moot! LOL
Agree with you on this. My current plan is dirt cheep for unlimited data and no 2 year contract, so I'll shell out the $530 if that's all official after the 5th!
people are trippin over $530 for a phone like this? I paid $550 for my unlocked fuze last year, $800 for unbranded touch pro 2 in April, unlocked motorola droid(milestone) is $800! Al least this phone has some kind of US 3G support, unlike most unbranded phones that come state side. I think I'm a get it day 1, and then get the Bravo when it come out later this year if Sense UI cant be import on the Nexus.
I agree with you guys wholeheartedly. To be honest though, I think it's most telling to compare plans in an apples to apples manner. I'm a dork with a background in finance, so yes, I created a spreadsheet to calculate all the costs incrementally to see where changes in costs were coming from in my comparison.
After running through the numbers and calculating total costs over a 24 month term, for the 500 minute EM and EM+ plans, with the respective phone costs, the total cost over 24 months if I bought the phone unlocked would be $1970. If I purchased it on contract for $180, the total I'd spend over 24 months would be $2100.
There's NO WAY that you'll spend more over the long term with the EM+ plan UNLESS you're eligible for a corporate discount on the EM plan (which I happily am). With my discount, the total for the EM plan comes to $1811, but that doesn't apply to everyone.
The problem here is that most people are spoiled by the subsidized prices of phones. What they're not realizing is that they're paying for that subsidy in the form of more expensive plans...and then some, as my illustration above clearly proves. If T-mobile allows us to finance unsubsidized phones for 20 months on EM+ plans, then this works out to be more manageable for consumers. Either way, though... people need to consider total cost of ownership (TCO)... not just monthly cost and initial cash outlay for the device.
Exactly! Thanks for doing that. People just don't look for future savings and would rather have instant gratification. They are excited by a cheap up front cost and monthly service fee be damned!
I totally agree with you. it is by far the best phone in terms of specifications and price compared to its competitors (iphone 3gs, HD2).
Thanks for explaining this to people.
T-Mo Unlimited Voice/Web/Text $79.99/mo x 24 months = $1,920
Phone: $530.00
====
Total: $2,450.00
IPhone Plan
AT&T Unlimited Voice/Web/Text $149.99/mo for 24 months = $3,600
Phone: $200.00
====
Total: $3,800.00
-No contract for the T-Mobile plan
-No texts? AT&T without any text message plan still comes to $3,320
I was hoping for unlocked-only availability. It would keep certain... um... people... from buying the phone and then flooding the forums with questions, tacky themes, etc.
Dont really care about the price. It's actually not too bad, but if they only offer a 3g for Tmobile version here in the states then why bother selling it from google? Now...if they offer a few versions that can do 3g on several of the networks, or the final device gives us 3g on AT&T and Tmobile (and perhaps they do a verizon version too!)...that would be an awesome sale.
lordmaxx said:
Dont really care about the price. It's actually not too bad, but if they only offer a 3g for Tmobile version here in the states then why bother selling it from google? Now...if they offer a few versions that can do 3g on several of the networks, or the final device gives us 3g on AT&T and Tmobile (and perhaps they do a verizon version too!)...that would be an awesome sale.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I imagine that Google will be releasing high-end phones for all carriers this year. I think they started with T-mobile for a variety of possible reasons. It's not beyond the realm of possibility that they felt that T-mo should get preference because they were the first carrier to carry the Android torch to market. I also wouldn't be surprised if Google had planned this all along and that T-mobile was promised to get the first "Google phone". Obviously this is all conjecture, but it makes sense from a business perspective.
uansari1 said:
I imagine that Google will be releasing high-end phones for all carriers this year. I think they started with T-mobile for a variety of possible reasons. It's not beyond the realm of possibility that they felt that T-mo should get preference because they were the first carrier to carry the Android torch to market. I also wouldn't be surprised if Google had planned this all along and that T-mobile was promised to get the first "Google phone". Obviously this is all conjecture, but it makes sense from a business perspective.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
But the problem with getting the first of anything is it will be ancient by the time other carriers receive their Android devices
Not necessarily. Given the specs of this phone, I can't see it becoming obsolete as quickly as the G1 did. I could be wrong, but how soon would you think a phone would come out with over 1ghz processor and over 512 ram and rom?
uansari1 said:
Not necessarily. Given the specs of this phone, I can't see it becoming obsolete as quickly as the G1 did. I could be wrong, but how soon would you think a phone would come out with over 1ghz processor and over 512 ram and rom?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Aren't there already two other snapdragon devices out? What about the rumors of another iphone being released later this year?
I think the g1 may have been just as big when it came out. Times change, so does technology. The N1 may seem like the hottest new device, but it's the Nexus ONE just as the Dream was the Gee ONE. Look at where we are now. With at least half a dozen android capable devices out in about a year and 50+ rumored by 2012.
andythefan said:
Aren't there already two other snapdragon devices out? What about the rumors of another iphone being released later this year?
I think the g1 may have been just as big when it came out. Times change, so does technology. The N1 may seem like the hottest new device, but it's the Nexus ONE just as the Dream was the Gee ONE. Look at where we are now. With at least half a dozen android capable devices out in about a year and 50+ rumored by 2012.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Your points are well taken. No one's saying that this is THE ultimate phone of all time. It's simply the greatest Android phone to be released yet, and based on its specs, it seems to be a very significant advance forward in hardware as compared to other devices, aside from Droid.
uansari1 said:
Your points are well taken. No one's saying that this is THE ultimate phone of all time. It's simply the greatest Android phone to be released yet, and based on its specs, it seems to be a very significant advance forward in hardware as compared to other devices, aside from Droid.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Before the Droid all the Android devices were mostly similar (form factor, screen resolution/size, cpu, etc). This is just like the Droid. It was supposed to be the greatest Android device until the next phone showed up a few months later. How do we know a device with similar or better specs won't show up soon? HTC's leaked roadmap has a lot of impressive devices scheduled for this year.
The marketplace is only going to fragment even more Developers aren't happy coding for all these different devices.
IDK if you all are missing the point or if maybe im just redirecting it but here goes
This does not fit into how google normally does things. Correct me if im wrong but the formula usually goes
Take good service/software and make it better + dirt cheap or free+data mining = profit$$
If they aren't subsidizing any of the cost, why should we let them have our data?
esincho said:
people are trippin over $530 for a phone like this? I paid $550 for my unlocked fuze last year, $800 for unbranded touch pro 2 in April, unlocked motorola droid(milestone) is $800! Al least this phone has some kind of US 3G support, unlike most unbranded phones that come state side. I think I'm a get it day 1, and then get the Bravo when it come out later this year if Sense UI cant be import on the Nexus.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I am fully agree with your statement that at least this phone has some sort of US 3G support which many unlocked phones lacked or manufacturers are too slow to release the US 3G version (read: Nokia N95 NAM edition).
I think this angry attitude is a manifestation of our credit-driven lifestyle. Many people don't realize that paying cheaper price for a phone alongside mandatory 2 years contract (and ETFs if we decided to cancel) is more expensive. Even if they do, the fact that they can OWN the product NOW (regardless whether you can afford the whole price or not) is what makes it desirable in this part of the world.
Regarding the fact that it doesn't support AT&T 3G bands, well suck it up because iPhone didn't support T-Mobile 3G either and I'm sure there are many Tmob subscribers are interested to get that capabilities too. Until US cleared up these 3G band fragmentation (which probably won't happen), we are at the mercy of these manufacturers to step up their game and put in Quad Band UMTS as opposed to cherry picking 3 UMTS bands to be put into their phones.
Only thing making me think twice is when will a keyboard version of the hardware come out.
burton14e7 said:
Only thing making me think twice is when will a keyboard version of the hardware come out.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The keyboard phone with these specs would be the next G1, most likely to come out just in time for the early G1 adopters to renew their contracts.
uansari1 said:
I agree with you guys wholeheartedly. To be honest though, I think it's most telling to compare plans in an apples to apples manner. I'm a dork with a background in finance, so yes, I created a spreadsheet to calculate all the costs incrementally to see where changes in costs were coming from in my comparison.
After running through the numbers and calculating total costs over a 24 month term, for the 500 minute EM and EM+ plans, with the respective phone costs, the total cost over 24 months if I bought the phone unlocked would be $1970. If I purchased it on contract for $180, the total I'd spend over 24 months would be $2100.
There's NO WAY that you'll spend more over the long term with the EM+ plan UNLESS you're eligible for a corporate discount on the EM plan (which I happily am). With my discount, the total for the EM plan comes to $1811, but that doesn't apply to everyone.
The problem here is that most people are spoiled by the subsidized prices of phones. What they're not realizing is that they're paying for that subsidy in the form of more expensive plans...and then some, as my illustration above clearly proves. If T-mobile allows us to finance unsubsidized phones for 20 months on EM+ plans, then this works out to be more manageable for consumers. Either way, though... people need to consider total cost of ownership (TCO)... not just monthly cost and initial cash outlay for the device.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Expanding on this and assuming no discounts...
Option A) Buy the phone for $180 subsidized and the 500-minute plan for $80/mo, signing a contract to pay $2100 total over 24 mos.
Option B) Buy the phone for $530 unsubsidized and unlocked and choose the comparable 500-minute plus unlimited text/data Even More Plus plan for $60/mo for a total cost of $1970 over 24 mos with no contract.
So over two years of the phone and contract, you save $130 by going with option B.
But will you really last two years? Let's see what happens if you want to change phones after one year, which is entirely possible given the rate at which mobile technology is moving.
Option A) Early reports indicate a $350 early termination fee imposed by T-Mobile during the first 120 days, but no details have been learned about the fee past that window. Let's assume it reduces linearly to zero over the remaining life of the contract, meaning your fee for leaving early would be $210 at the one year mark. This puts you at $1350 to get out free and clear from the phone and contract.
Option B) You have no ETF, so you'll have paid $1250 at the end of one year.
So, even after just a year you still spend $100 less buying unsubsidized. Further, your phone will already be unlocked and unbranded, ready for quick sale on E-bay.
Pretty simple choice for me. Less money & easy to move on = no-brainer.
Guys I just wanted to give you a forewarning about T-Mobile's business practices.
I apologize if anyone takes offense but I am simply posting my experience with T-Mobile. I understand I signed a 2 year contract but where I am moving I have horrible service and I am not asking for a sympathy boat either, but if you don't agree with the way T-Mobile handled this, please feel free to upvote this.
tl;dr - T-Mobile's map shows 4+ bars where I'm moving; we (my fiancee and I) get 2... outside and that doesn't include the many dropped calls we get either. I never got a dropped call until I went to the new location. I have to pay $300 in cancellation fees because they wouldn't budge because their map is supposedly "right."
http://www.reddit.com/r/technology/comments/b5php/tmobile_trying_to_screw_over_their_own_customer/
If you guys are willing, please upvote. I'd really appreciate it.
Once your locked in....its pretty hard to get out.
Yeah I'm seeing that now. I honestly loved the service, but now that I am moving, it's no good to me.
Contracts blow. Stupidest thing you can ever do is lock yourself into a phone contract, especially when there is the possibility of moving, and the FACT that in a few months, some OTHER carrier will probably offer a better deal. Might as well avail yourself to the chance!
It is ALWAYS better to buy your phone outright.
Note: I suspect that eventually, the US carriers will be forced out of their contract practices.... we in CANADA even already have a new NATIONAL carrier that DOES NOT OFFER contracts.
I've never understood contracts personally, I hate being tied into anything just because they give you a sparkly new phone. That's why I'm thankful T-mobile have 30 day rolling sim only deals, I can get huge discounts after a year on a newer phone upgrade, get 350 minutes (any network) unlimited text and free unlimited internet (thank you rewards) for £15 a month and can walk away with only 30 days notice anytime.
Thank god for the sim only plan
thats why you get used phones and no contract.. plus being on an employee plan is always nice
You don't need to get a used phone... the carrier will still sell you the phone without contract, just at the "full price". You can also buy your phone from a STORE rather than from the carrier.
Note: The way the contract works, you end up actually paying SIGNIFICANTLY MORE for the phone through the contract than just buying the thing from a store for full price.
lbcoder said:
You don't need to get a used phone... the carrier will still sell you the phone without contract, just at the "full price". You can also buy your phone from a STORE rather than from the carrier.
Note: The way the contract works, you end up actually paying SIGNIFICANTLY MORE for the phone through the contract than just buying the thing from a store for full price.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The problem is that the full price of these devices is quite high. A lot of people can only afford a decent phone by getting the contract.
Another problem I had when looking at the g1 initially was a lack of good data plans on non-contract deals.
The people that are telling you it's cheaper to buy your phone outright... this really isn't the case for the G1. At launch, I purchased my G1 for $179 in 2 year contract. Unlocked would have cost $399. I needed phone service regardless, so the fact that I was paying for service is moot.
Now, when I moved, I knew I wasn't going to still get service, and didn't want to stick with T-Mobile. So I paid the $200 to get out of contract. That brings the total cost of the phone up to $379. That's pretty damn close to the $399 price point I would have paid for an unlocked phone from the start .
To the OP, your only real choice is to live with it or pay the termination fees. Read every contract you sign carefully. Service outage isn't a reason to break the contract. It sucks, but that's US carriers for you.
I appreciate all of the responses but again, why pay for a service I cannot use? I had no intention of moving until after the contract; things changed, so I had no option. I'll just be glad when contracts like this are over with worldwide; cell phones could get away with murder if they wanted to. BLEH I say, haha.
We will see how things turn out with the FCC and FTC. Maybe my complaint will push them over the barrier and stop advertising fake signal readings? Roughly 5 phones report all the same exact thing, but their map is always right apparently.
BBB will probably just tell me to deal with it, so we will see on that too.
Again, thanks guys.
esmith972 said:
I appreciate all of the responses but again, why pay for a service I cannot use? I had no intention of moving until after the contract; things changed, so I had no option. I'll just be glad when contracts like this are over with worldwide; cell phones could get away with murder if they wanted to. BLEH I say, haha.
We will see how things turn out with the FCC and FTC. Maybe my complaint will push them over the barrier and stop advertising fake signal readings? Roughly 5 phones report all the same exact thing, but their map is always right apparently.
BBB will probably just tell me to deal with it, so we will see on that too.
Again, thanks guys.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
have you upgraded your radio ?
have you tried using EDGE instead ?
you seem more upset with the contract than the service, and one of those two might help things.
if you're at 2 bars with edge, ya, that's pretty bad. 2 on 3g is about average to bounce around at from my experience. 2 - 4 on 3g can mean a person standing between me and the tower.
good luck
That's why I hate contracts. You get a $600 phone for $150, but you're stuck with it for 2 years. And you envy evr1 who gets a new phone while you're stuck with yours and then in 2 years when you get a settle phone, a new one comes out a month later.
Just as an update, T-Mobile received my complaint from the FCC and took the charges off immediately. I'm only left with the last monthly bill.
Goes to show they do care about you... a little.
So how exactly did you get FCC to contact T-mobile, you write them a letter, eh?
The squeakiest wheel gets the oil.
Good to hear it mate . Generally they won't budge as far as cancellation fees, from my experience.
I wanna upgrade down the so I wanna know how the discount system work cuz don't wanna pay full price
Sent from my SGH-T959 using XDA App
To quote directly from My T-Mobile:
Your phone upgrade eligibility is determined by the amount of time that has passed since your last upgrade, as well as the monthly cost of your rate plan.
You'll get our best upgrade pricing if it's been 11 months or more since your last upgrade (if you have a one-year service agreement), or 22 months or more since your last upgrade (if you have a two-year service agreement).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm currently on a family plan with 3 other family members. I recently upgraded my phone so if I attempt to upgrade MY line for ANY phone I HAVE to pay the full MSRP: $399.99 for the Vibrant, $499.99 for the Vibrant 4G/G2, etc...even WITH a 2-year contract extension)
My aunt's line which has not been upgraded recently only forces her to pay the current prices of each phone with a new 2-year extension ($199.99 for the Vibrant 4G). It all depends on how you're willing to wait. But always know that most/all Android phones require a data plan of some sort. The options are limited online, but you can always go to a store and haggle prices of phones/plans
Buying outright is more cost for the phone upfront, it it is less cost for the plan. IT is always cheaper to go that way over 2 years, and you are not tied into a contract
I have not had a contract for over 4 years. I buy my phones off craigs list. Just check out the phone before you buy it. I have gotten my last 3 phones that way. Paid 200 buck for my vibrant.
If you have been a Tmo customer for a while (meaning several years and purchased at least 2 phones from them) You may be able to get something if you raise a little bit of a stink. They like to appease displeased customers and if you complain about something in an adult way, you can possibly get approved for an early upgrade.
A buddy of mine was able to get an early upgrade because he was not on an android device and was curious to see how much of an improvement in his mobile experience it would be to own one. So they allowed him to get a MT4G at the 2yr upgrade price.
I bought my vibrant full price the begining of Feb. and no contract. but then on Valentine weekend they were giving smart phones away for the weekend with 2 year contract. Needless to say my son needed a phone so I said what the heck. I ended up with a free mytouch 4g and my son a Vibrant. It ended up cheaper in the long run. But my MT4G sit's in my briefcase as I am having too much fun ROM'ing my Vibrant.
It's all in the timing as Tmobile is always having some kind of sale.
Qualcomm announced the next generation in Snapdragon – the S4 series scheduled for 2012. This new chipset brings the manufacturing process from 45nm to 28nm...... this is a big improvement. Clock speeds can go from 1.5GHz to 2.5GHz.
Here is the link if you want to read Phandroid's write up :
http://phandroid.com/2011/10/10/qualcomms-snapdragon-s4-chips-look-to-amaze-consumers-in-2012/
Here is the PDF from Qualcom for you techies:
Damn I wish smartphones were cheaper so I could buy a new one like every 6 months. 200 unsubsidized every six months would be perfect, but 500-600 is too much.
No reason for smartphones to cost 600 bucks when you can buy an Ivy Bridge laptop for 500 bucks.
It's the carriers fault, the carrier and their contracts gives no reason for manufacturers to lower prices on full retail pricing, not when you have the carrier paying you full price. Ahhhhh
I want the nexus prime then 6 months later I want a phone with this chipset!
SamsungVibrant said:
Damn I wish smartphones were cheaper so I could buy a new one like every 6 months. 200 unsubsidized every six months would be perfect, but 500-600 is too much.
No reason for smartphones to cost 600 bucks when you can buy an Ivy Bridge laptop for 500 bucks.
It's the carriers fault, the carrier and their contracts gives no reason for manufacturers to lower prices on full retail pricing, not when you have the carrier paying you full price. Ahhhhh
I want the nexus prime then 6 months later I want a phone with this chipset!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Exactly!
Sent from my SGH-T959 using xda premium
I agree phones cost too much, but then...that's capitalism..... I am going to get an S2 in a couple of days and then get Prime after that........ I wouldn't worry about the S4 chip-set too much probably will not be out until this time next year. I save my change every day and on average at the end of a year I have about 700 bucks, I then use that to get my android toys or whatever. This year is a short year I just weighed my quarters (1Lb =18.60) a Little over 32 lbs or 600 bucks....... but now I will have no money for parking.........
Well, the iPhone and most Android phones cost the manufacturer's $190-$250 to produce. Then they sell them to your carrier and make their profit. After that, your carrier subsidizes the cost of the phone to you for what, $199-$299?
Let's review. If it costs a manufacturer, say $200 to make their device, and they sell it to a carrier for $300 and that carrier sells it to you for $249 with a 2 year contract, how much money did the carrier make on the sale of the phone?
I can understand the pricing for non-contract phones. I can understand ETF's. If a customer buys a subsidized phone and jumps ship with no ETF/Penalty, the carrier is literally losing money.
I don't do contracts. I plan for what I want to buy, save for it, and bite the bullet. I paid full price from my Vibrant on day 1. Is it expensive? Yeah, sure, but there's this notion that smart phones cost $20 to make and the rest is an eleventy billion percent mark up, and that's not true. Do carriers jump that price WAY up? Yeah, absolutely, but it's a business move to try and get the consumer to sign a contract. If a customer is on contract, there's incentive for them to stay and the opportunity to make additional profit through the cost of the plan and any overage charges, accessory purchases.
KWKSLVR said:
Well, the iPhone and most Android phones cost the manufacturer's $190-$250 to produce. Then they sell them to your carrier and make their profit. After that, your carrier subsidizes the cost of the phone to you for what, $199-$299?
Let's review. If it costs a manufacturer, say $200 to make their device, and they sell it to a carrier for $300 and that carrier sells it to you for $249 with a 2 year contract, how much money did the carrier make on the sale of the phone?
I can understand the pricing for non-contract phones. I can understand ETF's. If a customer buys a subsidized phone and jumps ship with no ETF/Penalty, the carrier is literally losing money.
I don't do contracts. I plan for what I want to buy, save for it, and bite the bullet. I paid full price from my Vibrant on day 1. Is it expensive? Yeah, sure, but there's this notion that smart phones cost $20 to make and the rest is an eleventy billion percent mark up, and that's not true. Do carriers jump that price WAY up? Yeah, absolutely, but it's a business move to try and get the consumer to sign a contract. If a customer is on contract, there's incentive for them to stay and the opportunity to make additional profit through the cost of the plan and any overage charges, accessory purchases.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Totally agree and that's why I have not been under contract either I pay full price (minus my negotiating skill discount) over 2 years it is actually cheaper.
The other thing people may want to know say you have a brother/friend etc who doesn't over use their plan. If all the stars line up and work out right, you put him on your plan (20-30 extra per month) and you get the phone for 1/2 price even if you are on a non contract plan. If you brother/friend turns out to be a flake and never pays you after a year you dump him and you paid about 20 bucks less for the phone overall...........if he pays you say 50 bucks a month over a year you end up with the phone essentially free...... but remember a saving like this in this scenario is highly reliant all things working as the should perfectly....... and you know how often that happens ................
I used to try and get a good price, and through all my years at T-Mobile, I actually have in the past on more than one occasion. These days, it's harder to get a manager to come off of a phone. I really think that once they got bought out the last time corporate policy put the clamps down on it some.
I'm not a wasteful person anyway so paying full price for a smart phone every 18-24 months is one of the few things I splurge on. It's definitely cheaper in the long run on T-Mobile since your plan is cheaper. Shoot, I'm still on an EM+ plan. Sadly, I'll probably have to bite the bullet and move to VZW soon since I need a larger network and that's where the real raping begins.
So last night, I decided to go to an AT&T store to buy an LTE Note 8.0 only to find that the first three of the corporate stores I called didn't have any in stock. Finally, the fourth store I called had two left. So I went over there fully expecting to pay the full unlocked $499 price. To me, it didn't make sense to lock myself in for two years when I'd only save $100 over full retail.
When I walked in, though, I was helped by the store manager. He gets the tablet for me and then goes to look up my account info so he could convert my plan to a MobileShare. He saw that I bought a Galaxy S4 about 40 days ago and, much to my surprise, offered me the smartphone bundle promotion, which meant I could get the tablet on contract for $199. I knew about the promotion but just assumed I wouldn't qualify since I bought the phone before the Note 8.0 even launched.
Needless to say, saving $300 over full retail WAS enough to get me to go contract. There's great customer service and then there's the service I received last night. The manager totally didn't have to do that for me but offered without me even asking. :good:
Awesome! Gratz to hear about your saving. Att never did me wrong, even when they rep accidentally took away my unlimited data, I just call customer service and they just me back on unlimited data.
I had a similar experience. I purchased an S4 but the Note 8 available when I purchased it. When it was to be released by AT&T my AT&T Sales person called me to let me know it would be available on the morrow and they had 5 in the store and further that even though I had purchased my S4 16 days previous AT&T would give me the promo bundle price of $199.00. That is stellar service in my opinion.
Bruce
cataloochee said:
I had a similar experience. I purchased an S4 but the Note 8 available when I purchased it. When it was to be released by AT&T my AT&T Sales person called me to let me know it would be available on the morrow and they had 5 in the store and further that even though I had purchased my S4 16 days previous AT&T would give me the promo bundle price of $199.00. That is stellar service in my opinion.
Bruce
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
lol. Dealers do this all the time. They get people into promotions (most which they can find a way to make happen so long as its not too far outside the box).
The dealer did not do it to be helpful, which is the sad thing. Dealers, including managers, make more commission off contracts than they do off devices. So he would have made more commission still with that contract than having you spend money on devices. They do this because the company makes more money having you pay the monthly service cost than by having you buy a full cost phone or tablet.
In essence, it takes a company 18-24 months to make back the subsidized cost of a device. That means that 199 bucks you paid, you will pay back the missing 300 bucks on the plan after typically 18 months. Then they get 6 months of profit. So you do actually pay for the device for full cost anyways.,,,and they just extended out how long between upgrades and by the time you get around to actually being eligible for upgrade they may be extending it out further. The current discussions in the industry are talking about 3 year contracts and 2+ year upgrades.
What you have to consider is the lifetime cost of service and the device. They want you to buy a tablet. It makes you pay for their service, instead of just tethering your phone to the tablet. Tethering is cheaper, not contracts, and you wind up paying A LOT LESS even if you pay full cost for the device.
Truth is that ATT customers typically pay close to 1-2K more than many of the carriers that charge full cost for a device. Basically that 300 bucks you saved cost you at least a grand more in the end, and the manager who was "helping" you basically just weasled you into a contract where you will pay more for a separate plan for the tablet instead of just using cheaper tethering options (considering you still share data regardless) and he just got a good commission out of you.
Sad but true. You just got suckered.
How do I know? Nearly 7 years working in the wireless industry. Some of that time with AT&T and a great deal of that time with retail agents and retail policy.
I'm not trying to be a downer, but I hate AT&T dealers. After working for them for so long, Ive come to find that just about every single dealer if about as underhanded as a used car salesman trying to sell you a lemon and convince you its a ferrari. I used to see the dealers in my home town and my normal reaction to them is equivalent to the thought of "you sick bastard."
I do not know how many "deals" a dealer has done that I have had to fix, but typically even if their promises are kept they still use you and screw you over.
Ive even heard dealer chatter. How they talk about customers and think of customers as no more than a mark to be scammed so they can get their next commission. Ive seen more respect for their "victims" from the criminals on "to catch a predator."
phoenixbennu said:
lol. Dealers do this all the time. They get people into promotions (most which they can find a way to make happen so long as its not too far outside the box).
The dealer did not do it to be helpful, which is the sad thing. Dealers, including managers, make more commission off contracts than they do off devices. So he would have made more commission still with that contract than having you spend money on devices. They do this because the company makes more money having you pay the monthly service cost than by having you buy a full cost phone or tablet.
In essence, it takes a company 18-24 months to make back the subsidized cost of a device. That means that 199 bucks you paid, you will pay back the missing 300 bucks on the plan after typically 18 months. Then they get 6 months of profit. So you do actually pay for the device for full cost anyways.,,,and they just extended out how long between upgrades and by the time you get around to actually being eligible for upgrade they may be extending it out further. The current discussions in the industry are talking about 3 year contracts and 2+ year upgrades.
What you have to consider is the lifetime cost of service and the device. They want you to buy a tablet. It makes you pay for their service, instead of just tethering your phone to the tablet. Tethering is cheaper, not contracts, and you wind up paying A LOT LESS even if you pay full cost for the device.
Truth is that ATT customers typically pay close to 1-2K more than many of the carriers that charge full cost for a device. Basically that 300 bucks you saved cost you at least a grand more in the end, and the manager who was "helping" you basically just weasled you into a contract where you will pay more for a separate plan for the tablet instead of just using cheaper tethering options (considering you still share data regardless) and he just got a good commission out of you.
Sad but true. You just got suckered.
How do I know? Nearly 7 years working in the wireless industry. Some of that time with AT&T and a great deal of that time with retail agents and retail policy.
I'm not trying to be a downer, but I hate AT&T dealers. After working for them for so long, Ive come to find that just about every single dealer if about as underhanded as a used car salesman trying to sell you a lemon and convince you its a ferrari. I used to see the dealers in my home town and my normal reaction to them is equivalent to the thought of "you sick bastard."
I do not know how many "deals" a dealer has done that I have had to fix, but typically even if their promises are kept they still use you and screw you over.
Ive even heard dealer chatter. How they talk about customers and think of customers as no more than a mark to be scammed so they can get their next commission. Ive seen more respect for their "victims" from the criminals on "to catch a predator."
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
While your statements are true they are not necessarily accurate. The only way a person would have been "suckered" is if he didn't know what you describe. But almost all consumers realize that there is no free lunch and that the choice of purchasing outright or monthly result in the full price of the device being paid. The only difference is when payment accrues and how much the final cost will be. No different than purchasing a vehicle or a home.
In addition, the accuracy of your claim of being suckered depends on whether the purchaser bought because of the lower initial price or because he wanted the device in any case. In my case I had already decided to purchase the Note 8 from AT&T and only awaited the availability of the Note 8 at AT&T as I wanted the LTE data option. Thus, my only decision was whether to pay full price or add a two year contract to my account. Since I would have to have a data plan from AT&T to use the LTE feature in any case I needed to have an additional phone line. So I was able to get the regular discounted price or pay full price plus the new line costs (these I would pay no matter how I purchased the device and would last as long as I wanted to use the device). With the additional bundle price I decided to purchase at $199 instead of $399. Of course I realize I will pay full price over the next 24 months including the premium for purchasing by installment. But I knew that, considered it, and choose to do it. Thus, I made a considered decision and was not "suckered".
And clearly the sales staff is trying to sell devices and services that bring them the greatest commission. That's what they do for a living. The consumer knows that too. Maybe the real "suckers" are those sales people that think that they are being really "sharp".
Bruce
cataloochee said:
While your statements are true they are not necessarily accurate. The only way a person would have been "suckered" is if he didn't know what you describe. But almost all consumers realize that there is no free lunch and that the choice of purchasing outright or monthly result in the full price of the device being paid. The only difference is when payment accrues and how much the final cost will be. No different than purchasing a vehicle or a home.
In addition, the accuracy of your claim of being suckered depends on whether the purchaser bought because of the lower initial price or because he wanted the device in any case. In my case I had already decided to purchase the Note 8 from AT&T and only awaited the availability of the Note 8 at AT&T as I wanted the LTE data option. Thus, my only decision was whether to pay full price or add a two year contract to my account. Since I would have to have a data plan from AT&T to use the LTE feature in any case I needed to have an additional phone line. So I was able to get the regular discounted price or pay full price plus the new line costs (these I would pay no matter how I purchased the device and would last as long as I wanted to use the device). With the additional bundle price I decided to purchase at $199 instead of $399. Of course I realize I will pay full price over the next 24 months including the premium for purchasing by installment. But I knew that, considered it, and choose to do it. Thus, I made a considered decision and was not "suckered".
And clearly the sales staff is trying to sell devices and services that bring them the greatest commission. That's what they do for a living. The consumer knows that too. Maybe the real "suckers" are those sales people that think that they are being really "sharp".
Bruce
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Same here. I don't feel suckered. I walked into the AT&T store fully planning on paying $499 full retail for the tablet. The contract price was $399 and it wasn't worth it to me to lock myself in for 2 years purely to save $100 off retail. However, when I was offered $199 for the tablet, now we're talking about saving $300 over retail up front and that WAS worth it to me as far as locking myself in for two years. I was able to put the $300 toward something else and I love having an LTE tablet. Win-win. It's only being "suckered" if you're led to believe one thing and something different actually happens. I knew what I was getting into.
oldblue910 said:
Same here. I don't feel suckered. I walked into the AT&T store fully planning on paying $499 full retail for the tablet. The contract price was $399 and it wasn't worth it to me to lock myself in for 2 years purely to save $100 off retail. However, when I was offered $199 for the tablet, now we're talking about saving $300 over retail up front and that WAS worth it to me as far as locking myself in for two years. I was able to put the $300 toward something else and I love having an LTE tablet. Win-win. It's only being "suckered" if you're led to believe one thing and something different actually happens. I knew what I was getting into.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
"You can lead them to the water but you can't make them drink" Of course you know they will, because they're thirsty!!
Nice that's great that they took care of you.. In reality I think you came out on top because if they switched you to mobile share you are only payin $10 a month for that line being locked in for the next 2 years would be $240 so by being in contract you actually get the device for $60 less than full retail.. Great stuff had a similar experience and that's what pushed me over the edge to get it