In alt.cellular.t-mobile Grant Edwards <grante@visi.com> wrote:
> On 2008-01-07, LHA <nobody@nobody1.com1> wrote:
>
>> If the cellular companies provided the service and support
>> that their customers desire and deserve, they would NOT need
>> to lock us in with long, expensive contracts.
>
> As long as they're giving you a $200-$300 phone for free,
> they're going to require that you guarantee future purchases in
> order to cover the cost of that phone.
>

But they don't. They give you a $150 phone for free. They give you a $300
phone for $150 ... or sometimes if they have a sale on massive inventory or
vendor pricing discounts, they will give you the $300 for $99 or less ... but
the subsidy in this case is still $150 and the rest is money they discount
because of the manufacturer [i.e. Motorola pushing a KRZR] or to reduce
inventory on older models.

>> Why do we tolerate it?
>
> People tolerate it because they want a "free" phone.
>

Nothing is free in life and this especially applies to mobile phones.

I love Verizon, but if they don't implement the pro-rated early termination
fees as they promised to do 15+ months ago, then I may take my chances with
AT&T, because at least I can easily switch out phones via the card in the back
of the phone without risking contract changes, albeit, Verizon is pretty good
about not sneaking in contract renewals like Sprint PCS does.

--
Thomas T. Veldhouse

America is the country where you buy a lifetime
supply of aspirin for one dollar, and use it up in two weeks.