2 year subsidy phone upgrades early warning info

[WiWavelength]

I think you are going to find there were a lot more people sticking with sprint for contracts than you thought, and despite how much you hate them, they do and did make sprint money.

 

You offer no proof that contract subsidy plans are making Sprint enough money -- or any money, for that matter.  Your assertion is not sufficient evidence.

 

AJ

[greenbastard]

You offer no proof that contract subsidy plans are making Sprint enough money -- or any money, for that matter. Your assertion is not sufficient evidence.

 

AJ

And you offer no proof of sprint losing money through legacy plans either.

[WiWavelength]

And you offer no proof of sprint losing money through legacy plans either.

 

Not my responsibility.  I did not make that claim.

 

Sound reason and argument is not your strong suit, is it?

 

AJ

[teeitup]

S4GRU MISSION STATEMENT:

 

"To provide a forum for discussion and education about wireless spectrum, networks, and Sprint Network Vision, in particular, in an online community that is mature, intelligent, and free from uncritical negativity."

[optimummind]

So is it really gone on Sprint.com?

 

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

[darn18]

I agree the 2 year subsidy was the best thing that Sprint had to keep the existing customers. I might leave sprint as well when it;s time to renew my contract. I know others might feel differently about it but it is differently but our opinions are valid. We been thru a lot with sprint and this is the thanks we get?

[MacinJosh]

Seriously, what is it with you people? Leave Sprint over lack of 2 yr contracts? Oh brother.

[TimS]

Seriously, what is it with you people? Leave Sprint over lack of 2 yr contracts? Oh brother.

 

Sure - why not?  It is about value.  Removing contract subsidies puts Sprints prices close to the other carriers for me.  Take my family for example, we don't use a lot of data so moving to Verizon will not cost very much more than Sprint and it will provide a better network for us.  Before the removal of subsidies, the price difference was too big to make the jump.

[MacinJosh]

Sure - why not? It is about value. Removing contract subsidies puts Sprints prices close to the other carriers for me. Take my family for example, we don't use a lot of data so moving to Verizon will not cost very much more than Sprint and it will provide a better network for us. Before the removal of subsidies, the price difference was too big to make the jump.

And yet, I could have stayed with at&t and not paid much more than I did when I switched to Sprint. Network quality was about the same here where I live. Yet I chose to quit feeding into the greed of the Twin Bells.

 

It seems to me that those that only cared about Sprint for 2 year contracts shouldn't have even been here to begin with.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[TimS]

And yet, I could have stayed with at&t and not paid much more than I did when I switched to Sprint. Network quality was about the same here where I live. Yet I chose to quit feeding into the greed of the Twin Bells.

 

It seems to me that those that only cared about Sprint for 2 year contracts shouldn't have even been here to begin with.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

I don't understand why people worry about the companies.  I am going to focus on what provides the best value for my family, not what is best for Sprint.  By the way, I would call this a greedy move by Sprint so I guess that makes them just like AT&T and Verizon.

[rolentz]

I have been with Sprint since 1999. I stayed with them over the years for price, unlimited data and the ability to get new phones on contract every two years. (At one time I could even get a new phone on one line on contract every year.) Now only unlimited data is left, and I can get that with AT&T since I am a DirecTV subscriber.

 

Three of my five lines are now out of contact and a fourth will be out before the end of the year. My fifth line will then have less than a year to go. All things being equal at that point I will explore moving to AT&T even if I have to buy that fifth line out. There's nothing keeping me bound to Sprint any longer.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[greenbastard]

 

 

It seems to me that those that only cared about Sprint for 2 year contracts shouldn't have even been here to begin with.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

So anyone who chooses sprint as their carrier because of its value should not be with Sprint?

[MacinJosh]

So anyone who chooses sprint as their carrier because of its value should not be with Sprint?

I only specifically stated 2 year contract folks, not Sprint customers in general.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[troyd96]

I only specifically stated 2 year contract folks, not Sprint customers in general.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

LOL... A lot of people choosing any carrier do a cost benefit analysis for value for their money versus quality of service. A lot of people stuck with Sprint even though the data on the network is slower and in my area a lot more dead spots even for usable cell service(voice).

 

The data is still slower than other carriers in my market, but I'm fine with that for the unlimited data and getting a nice phone for $200 or so every two years.

 

Based on my corporate discount the legacy plans and subsidized phones every 2 years is cheaper over that 2 years versus doing a cost analysis of any lease, easy pay, or buying a new premium phone outright with any new sprint plan. Not to mention my legacy plan allows me to have unthrottled data versus the new plans marketing term of "video and audio optimization" which is just a glorified word for throttling certain aspects of your data usage.

 

The savings my family gets from being on the legacy plan (ED1500) and subsided phones is such a great amount we have never even thought about going to another carrier. In 1.5 years when my lines come out of contract the cost saving of sprint is now no longer as appealing and I can easily pay the same or just a little bit more for a better network in my market. So at that point the cost/benefit analysis comes into play once again.

 

I am like another poster. I don't get why people are more for Sprint succeeding versus their own financial benefit and well being. I want Sprint to succeed but if they make business decisions that end up making them lose their advantage for me using them then I have no issues finding a new company if it makes financial sense to do so. That is capitalism at its finest.

 

Never understood the vibe on this forum about Sprint being more important than the consumer.

 

Sent from my LG-LS997 using Tapatalk

Edited January 23, 2017 by troyd96

[jreuschl]

Yeah this really stinks.  Was holding out for the S8 (or G6 etc).  The least Sprint could do is give a notice...

 

Maybe they'll at least give us access to Tidal!! (groan)

[Dkoellerwx]

Yeah this really stinks.  Was holding out for the S8 (or G6 etc).  The least Sprint could do is give a notice...

 

Notice was given last year that 2 year contracts, and thus subsidized phones were going away. This particular topic was started in January of last year.

[kajex]

The larger issue for me on getting rid of the subsidies is Sprint's limited "whitelist" of devices you can use on their network along with the strict FED policy on buying used phones.  The options for Sprint devices are incredibly limited being mostly high-end flagships or crappy burner phones.  On T-Mobile, I can buy a vast number of phones that are good at much lower prices than flagships.  OnePlus, Motorola, ZTE, and Blu are all much less expensive than flagships and are not offered on Sprint.  Some of them like Moto Z and OnePlus make phones that have better features than Sprint flagships at a much lower price.  Once you factor in the prices for a good Sprint phone versus a good T-Mobile phone, it becomes much less expensive to switch to T-Mobile.

 

I've stuck with Sprint for as long as I have because of SERO.  But even SERO has few advantages over T-Mobile since each time we try to swap phones, we're told we need to move to a $60 SERO unlimited and that the $50 SERO is being phased out.  At a $10 price difference between SERO unlimited and T-Mobile unlimited, the cost of a new phone really is the difference in how much the monthly bill amounts to.

 

If Sprint wants to kill subsidies to maintain profitability, that's great for Sprint.  If they want to maintain customers, they really need to become more flexible on which phones can be offered on their network.  Otherwise, they really are not being competitive.  

[troyd96]

Notice was given last year that 2 year contracts, and thus subsidized phones were going away. This particular topic was started in January of last year.

Not so fast. Yes to new customers 2 year subsidies went away and was announced. Any current customer could get a 2 year contract still for a long time even through retailers then eventually only at Sprint. In fact the announcement said they would still give 2 year contracts on a reactive basis which is how I got my last one on both my lines back in September.

 

So no there was no notice of getting rid of them even on a reactive basis.

 

Luckily for me I think my account is still set up as a business account back from my old Nextel days so I may still be able to get them even in 1.5 years.

Sent from my LG-LS997 using Tapatalk

Edited January 23, 2017 by troyd96

[optimummind]

LOL... A lot of people choosing any carrier do a cost benefit analysis for value for their money versus quality of service. A lot of people stuck with Sprint even though the data on the network is slower and in my area a lot more dead spots even for usable cell service(voice).

 

The data is still slower than other carriers in my market, but I'm fine with that for the unlimited data and getting a nice phone for $200 or so every two years.

 

Based on my corporate discount the legacy plans and subsidized phones every 2 years is cheaper over that 2 years versus doing a cost analysis of any lease, easy pay, or buying a new premium phone outright with any new sprint plan. Not to mention my legacy plan allows me to have unthrottled data versus the new plans marketing term of "video and audio optimization" which is just a glorified word for throttling certain aspects of your data usage.

 

The savings my family gets from being on the legacy plan (ED1500) and subsided phones is such a great amount we have never even thought about going to another carrier. In 1.5 years when my lines come out of contract the cost saving of sprint is now no longer as appealing and I can easily pay the same or just a little bit more for a better network in my market. So at that point the cost/benefit analysis comes into play once again.

 

I am like another poster. I don't get why people are more for Sprint succeeding versus their own financial benefit and well being. I want Sprint to succeed but if they make business decisions that end up making them lose their advantage for me using them then I have no issues finding a new company if it makes financial sense to do so. That is capitalism at its finest.

 

Never understood the vibe on this forum about Sprint being more important than the consumer.

 

Sent from my LG-LS997 using Tapatalk

Well said. I own Sprint stock but I still want 2-yr contracts.

 

And I chose Sprint during the ED1500 days for the value it offered me & stayed b/c of its value. If the value lessens, as it has with no more 2-yr contract options, that's when I will switch for a carrier that offers a better network & more phone and wearable choices for very similar pricing.

 

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

[davidtm]

I checked this on the web site last night, and the 2-yr option was available for my wife's number. (She's been eligible for some time, but didn't want to change phones until lately.) When I checked again today, that option was gone. My concern now is that our contract end dates are scattered. One of my daughter's just got a new phone last month. So, are all of the rest of us (5 lines total) stuck until 2 yrs from now?

 

Sent from my SM-T530NU using Tapatalk

[teeitup]

Well said. I own Sprint stock but I still want 2-yr contracts.

 

And I chose Sprint during the ED1500 days for the value it offered me & stayed b/c of its value. If the value lessens, as it has with no more 2-yr contract options, that's when I will switch for a carrier that offers a better network & more phone and wearable choices for very similar pricing.

 

 

LOL... A lot of people choosing any carrier do a cost benefit analysis for value for their money versus quality of service. A lot of people stuck with Sprint even though the data on the network is slower and in my area a lot more dead spots even for usable cell service(voice).

 

The data is still slower than other carriers in my market, but I'm fine with that for the unlimited data and getting a nice phone for $200 or so every two years.

 

Based on my corporate discount the legacy plans and subsidized phones every 2 years is cheaper over that 2 years versus doing a cost analysis of any lease, easy pay, or buying a new premium phone outright with any new sprint plan. Not to mention my legacy plan allows me to have unthrottled data versus the new plans marketing term of "video and audio optimization" which is just a glorified word for throttling certain aspects of your data usage.

 

The savings my family gets from being on the legacy plan (ED1500) and subsided phones is such a great amount we have never even thought about going to another carrier. In 1.5 years when my lines come out of contract the cost saving of sprint is now no longer as appealing and I can easily pay the same or just a little bit more for a better network in my market. So at that point the cost/benefit analysis comes into play once again.

 

I am like another poster. I don't get why people are more for Sprint succeeding versus their own financial benefit and well being. I want Sprint to succeed but if they make business decisions that end up making them lose their advantage for me using them then I have no issues finding a new company if it makes financial sense to do so. That is capitalism at its finest.

 

Never understood the vibe on this forum about Sprint being more important than the consumer.

Great posts.  I'm also on 5 line ED1500 plan and a Sprint shareholder.  I want to see Sprint succeed but as a customer I'm going to look for the best value/service.  I grumbled at first when I had to give up my Fair & Flexible plan because it wouldn't allow Smartphones but ED1500 has been great.  Losing the subsidy is huge.  For me, the subsidy is the tipping point of what makes Sprint have value over the competition.  The model is simple and I knew that my lines could get a new phone every 2 years for a fair price and I would actually own the phone.  Plus, I felt some loyalty to Sprint because they maintained a program for long-time customers who chose it over leasing, easy-pay, new-phone-forevever or whatever.  I will see how this shakes out.  This isn’t the first time Sprint has tried to end 2-year agreements.  Fingers crossed it will still be open through certain channels (2 year upgrades still showing up on Apple.com).

 

Otherwise, the new $55 Verizon 5GB plan I saw advertised during the game yesterday is looking pretty good.  And with Verizon I get to stream any NFL game for free.  

[teeitup]

I checked this on the web site last night, and the 2-yr option was available for my wife's number. (She's been eligible for some time, but didn't want to change phones until lately.) When I checked again today, that option was gone. My concern now is that our contract end dates are scattered. One of my daughter's just got a new phone last month. So, are all of the rest of us (5 lines total) stuck until 2 yrs from now?

 

Sent from my SM-T530NU using Tapatalk

 

Your limited to iPhone but Apple.com still shows Sprint 2-year upgrades available.  None of my lines are eligible so I can't get past the eligibility checker but the option is still there.

[banananuts87]

Anyone tweet and get a response from Marcelo about this?

[jreuschl]

Anyone tweet and get a response from Marcelo about this?

 

I've copied Sprint and him twice, didn't get any good response, just a sorry for the inconvenience.

 

@sprintcare @marceloclaure Not good you took away 2 year contract options for legacy plans over the weekend without warning.

 

@sprintcare @marceloclaure "Inconvenience"? Going from $199 contract price for S7 to now $28.96x24 = $695.04 is little more than that.

 

 

@jreuschl We apologize for any inconvenience this caused you. Feel free 2 follow & DM if we can address a srvc or acct issue @marceloclaure

 

@jreuschl We'd be happy to review your billing concerns with you. Please Follow & DM your contact info so we can reach out @marceloclaure

[jreuschl]

Your limited to iPhone but Apple.com still shows Sprint 2-year upgrades available.  None of my lines are eligible so I can't get past the eligibility checker but the option is still there.

 

This doesn't work for those on SERO plans since they are considered an "employee" account but others may want to use this as a last opportunity, assuming it goes through after the order.