At 09 Jan 2008 18:16:52 +0000 Thomas T. Veldhouse wrote:

> > True- but they're making money either way; whether you pay the full
> > unsubsidized price, or re-up for two years. Again, the point is, if the
> > "Uberfone 5000", or whatever model you really want can be obtained $150-
200
> > cheaper with a contract, why not? If circumstances change and you need
to
> > break the contract, you pay the $150-200 EFT and no harm done- it was
the
> > amount of the discount anyway.
> >
>
> This is precisely what I was trying to say, except that their EFT is
usually
> MORE than the subsidy, so the carrier comes out ahead ...

I guess that depends on your POV. I find the subsidy and EFT are in each
other's ballpark, at least.

> and they don't lower
> the price of your monthly plan when the subsidy is paid up ... which
means you
> should threaten churn to keep your money, as otherwise it is pure profit
for
> them ... a greedy model.


You also are no longer under contract, either. I liken it to a magazine
subscription- a subscription is cheaper per issue than the "no committment"
newsstand price. Instead of a service discount for your two-year
"subscription" you get a phone subsidy.

> I would rather have the option to buy a phone that is not locked to any
> carrier and buy that phone at full price. Then I should be able to
activate
> it with any carrier and not pay the plan price that subsidized buyers pay.

I agree fully. On the other hand, it's probably better for the free market
to eventually come to that conclusion that through forced regulation.

Plus, you never know what you as an individual can negotiate. When T-Mo
was out of stock on a particular handset I wanted in April 2006, (my
current WinMo phone,) I convinced them to apply a $200 "subsidy" directly
to my account in exchange for a one-year committment so I could buy the
handset I wanted from an independent dealer who had it in stock. It took a
bit of convincing, but I managed to get them to do it. (I did have to fax
them a receipt to "prove" I bought the handset before they applied the $200
credit.)

While I agree with your previous post that CDMA offers certain
technological advantages over GSM, GSM offers certain practical advantages-
namely it's not used by Verizon or Sprint, so GSM users aren't bound by
those carrier's oppressive handset policies! ;-)