Marcelo Claure, Town Hall Meetings, New Family Share Pack Plan, Unlimited Individual Plan, Discussion Thread

[WiWavelength]

Not sure what this is supposed to be countering, there have always been cheaper phones available for consumers to purchase.

 

If you are suggesting 'quality' phones at cheaper prices is some kind of counter point, I submit that would have happened regardless of subsidization or lack thereof.

 

My point still stands, unless a user extends their phones life over 2+ years, current non-subsidized plans are at best minimally more expensive, to at worst a lot more expensive.

 

No, you and others miss my counterpoint.

 

Why should the $350 2013 Nexus 5 and $400 2015 Moto X -- to use just two well known examples -- even exist if someone can get an Android or iPhone for "$200" on contract?  That is a rhetorical question, and the answer is the rise of non contract, non subsidy plans.

 

It will take time, but the non contract, non subsidy plans are making many people realize that those actually $700 handsets are too damn expensive for them.  The non contract, direct sale $200-400 handsets will continue to grow in number and popularity.  Hopefully, they will move the wireless operators out of consumer electronics sales, which they never should have been in the first place.

 

And, like it or not, plans are going to have to become more expensive.  Because nearly everyone is using much, much, much more wireless data.  That requires tremendous network investment, which has to be paid for somehow.

 

If you do not like that and want to lower your plan costs, limit your data usage on a tiered plan.  If you want to keep your old sweetheart deal of "unlimited" data, yet subsidized upgrades have been discontinued, too bad.

 

AJ

[Steve Dean]

 

 

If you do not like that and want to lower your plan costs, limit your data usage on a tiered plan.  If you want to keep your old sweetheart deal of "unlimited" data, yet subsidized upgrades have been discontinued, too bad.

 

AJ

 

I have to agree with AJ.  I have purchased my last four phones outright without any subsidies. I hope by doing this and paying the amount that I pay Sprint monthly will allow for me and my family to keep our data plan unlimited.

[WiWavelength]

I have to agree with AJ.  I have purchased my last four phones outright without any subsidies. I hope by doing this and paying the amount that I pay Sprint monthly will allow for me and my family to keep our data plan unlimited.

 

The consensus seems to be that "unlimited" data may remain or be grandfathered on legacy plans.  But subsidized upgrades will no longer be available.  In such case, the choice may be yours.  Is that still worth it to pay your plan price and receive no subsidized upgrades?  Or should you move to a newer non contract, non subsidy plan?

 

AJ

[thefisch6]

The consensus seems to be that "unlimited" data may remain or be grandfathered on legacy plans. But subsidized upgrades will no longer be available. In such case, the choice may be yours. Is that still worth it to pay your plan price and receive no subsidized upgrades? Or should you move to a newer non contract, non subsidy plan?

 

AJ

I think that is exactly the way to go about it. I'm guessing that's what Sprint will implement sometime next year.

[WiWavelength]

I think that is exactly the way to go about it. I'm guessing that's what Sprint will implement sometime next year.

 

And though I am no fan of allowing subs to remain on the outdated sweetheart deals from the dark Sprint days, if they are allowed to be grandfathered, just without future subsidized upgrades, then they also can benefit from the non contract, direct sale $200-400 handsets that are becoming more and more common.  That is part of my counterpoint to dedub, who seems just to want the outdated sweetheart contract plans to continue.

 

AJ

[tybo31316]

I agree with AJ. Those folks who can't afford a subsidized $200 may not be able to afford a $700 phone with installments too. Or they will realize that $700 is too much to pay for a device and start to shop the mid range phones. Also, installments may be a cheaper up front option for larger families vs the traditional 2 year option.

 

Sent from my Nexus 6

[always_learner]

Maybe there will some correlation between iPhone 6s sales and the non-subsidy cell phone model.  Hopefully even Apple will be forced to compete on price.

 

Sprint would be the only carrier selling the subsidized iPhone 6s, correct?

[jamisonshaw125]

Maybe there will some correlation between iPhone 6s sales and the non-subsidy cell phone model.  Hopefully even Apple will be forced to compete on price.

 

Sprint would be the only carrier selling the subsidized iPhone 6s, correct?

I'm intersted to see how that plays out with Apple. I feel a lot of customers that still have their ED plan with iPhones would be pretty upset to find out they all of the sudden can no longer user their 2 year upgrade and must pay full price for their iPhone. I don't t think I would switch to android devices, I would just keep my 6...which still effects Apple.

[always_learner]

I'm intersted to see how that plays out with Apple. I feel a lot of customers that still have their ED plan with iPhones would be pretty upset to find out they all of the sudden can no longer user their 2 year upgrade and must pay full price for their iPhone. I don't t think I would switch to android devices, I would just keep my 6...which still effects Apple.

Definitely, but I'm not sure if a phone's battery would last more than two years, and it seems that more and more phone manufacturers are starting to build their phones with non-replaceable batteries.

 

People might skip the iPhone 6s, Galaxy S7, and HTC M10, but their iPhone 6, Galaxy S6, and HTC M9, respectively, might not last them another cycle because their batteries would start to give out.  They would have to buy the iPhone 7, Galaxy S8, and HTC M11.

 

Every two years, then, they would have to lease or buy their phones full retail price.  I'm not sure what incentive Apple, Samsung, and HTC would have to lower their prices if people continue to buy their phones every two years.  Not sure also if consumers would consider a cheaper Nexus, Motorola, OnePlus, or Asus phone especially since Sprint might not even white-list those phones.

[GoBigRed79]

Maybe there will some correlation between iPhone 6s sales and the non-subsidy cell phone model.  Hopefully even Apple will be forced to compete on price.

 

Sprint would be the only carrier selling the subsidized iPhone 6s, correct?

 

And this is one of the reasons Apple stock is under pressure lately.  Analysts believe Apple will have to compete on price as subsidy pricing goes away and lower priced handsets get better.  A good chunk of Apple profit is from the fat iPhone margins they have enjoyed the past few years.  Estimates put margins on the iPhone 6 in the 50% - 60% range.  http://fortune.com/2014/09/23/morgan-stanley-chinas-favorite-iphone-is-apples-most-profitable/

[chamb]

Maybe it's just me, but I want to see them remain separate companies.  I think Shentel has generally done a much better job of being competitive with the duopoly and completing their build-outs in a timely fashion.  If Shentel became a part of Sprint, is there any guarantee they would continue to do that?

 

- Trip

I agree Trip.  Why mess with Shentel?  They have been doing a GREAT job for Sprint. They will fix the nTelos area. It ain't going to be easy, but they will do it.  When somebody is doing a great job on anything, you should help them and praise them.

[dnicekid]

Ok everyone that loves iphones needs to see this.....

 

I am old cant make it out whats it saying??

[GoBigRed79]

Definitely, but I'm not sure if a phone's battery would last more than two years, and it seems that more and more phone manufacturers are starting to build their phones with non-replaceable batteries.

 

People might skip the iPhone 6s, Galaxy S7, and HTC M10, but their iPhone 6, Galaxy S6, and HTC M9, respectively, might not last them another cycle because their batteries would start to give out.  They would have to buy the iPhone 7, Galaxy S8, and HTC M11.

 

Every two years, then, they would have to lease or buy their phones full retail price.  I'm not sure what incentive Apple, Samsung, and HTC would have to lower their prices if people continue to buy their phones every two years.  Not sure also if consumers would consider a cheaper Nexus, Motorola, OnePlus, or Asus phone especially since Sprint might not even white-list those phones.

 

Apple will replace the battery for $79 ( no extra cost under warranty if you have Applecare).  Not cheep but if it gets another year or two out of an otherwise working phone it is not a bad option.  Today's phones can last much longer then two years.  I am still on an iPad 2 I bought 4 years ago and it works just fine for what I do. 

[Rocket87]

I am old cant make it out whats it saying??

Basically lease an iphone and be able to upgrade when ever you want just like tmobiles jump on demand. $22 a month so just an extra $2 and for a limited time its discounted to $15

 

Sent from my SM-N910P using Tapatalk

[thefisch6]

And though I am no fan of allowing subs to remain on the outdated sweetheart deals from the dark Sprint days, if they are allowed to be grandfathered, just without future subsidized upgrades, then they also can benefit from the non contract, direct sale $200-400 handsets that are becoming more and more common. That is part of my counterpoint to dedub, who seems just to want the outdated sweetheart contract plans to continue.

 

AJ

I am on one such outdated plan and I can see the idea behind both opinions. But I think it's fairly obvious that no carrier, Sprint or otherwise, can continue to support the outdated plans AND offer subsidized handset pricing on those plans. I think a reasonable compromise is to give people the option of keeping their outdated plans but forcing them to buy handsets at full price, or to abandon their legacy unlimited plan in favor of a newer plan if they can't stomach paying full price for handsets. I have a feeling that would end up driving a decent number of people off of legacy unlimited plans, but give some the option to keep theirs if they desire.

[bipbapbam]

I'm intersted to see how that plays out with Apple. I feel a lot of customers that still have their ED plan with iPhones would be pretty upset to find out they all of the sudden can no longer user their 2 year upgrade and must pay full price for their iPhone. I don't t think I would switch to android devices, I would just keep my 6...which still effects Apple.

According to this (https://www.reddit.com/r/verizon/comments/3ghy3i/if_you_are_currently_on_an_older_nationwide_plan/) reddit post, Verizon will continue to allow contract renewal with subsidized phone pricing for people on Legacy plans. Hopefully if Sprint decides to do away with contracts, they will follow suit and allow subsidized phones for legacy plan holders. Now, assuming this is how it will actually be for Verizon, I'm very eager to see how Apple will announce their pricing for their new phones come next month. Starting their prices at $650 and going all the way up to $950 will bring to light the true cost of phones and will hopefully make people reconsider how much they are actually willing to spend on a phone. If you ask me, paying over half a grand for a phone is kind of rediculous, I can buy a decent laptop, good monitor and desktop speakers for the amount of $650. But I also think it won't affect sales very much.. because, Apple. One thing they are good at is making sure people get trapped in their ecosystem.

[tybo31316]

I think that Apple will show the EIP pricing when they reveal the iPhone 6s. Pretty much every carrier in the US is doing installments now. Apple will show the EIP installment pricing to make the products appear cheaper than they are. The average consumer probably won't do the math. This is just my opinion of what I think Apple will do.

 

Sent from my Nexus 6

[Steve Dean]

The consensus seems to be that "unlimited" data may remain or be grandfathered on legacy plans.  But subsidized upgrades will no longer be available.  In such case, the choice may be yours.  Is that still worth it to pay your plan price and receive no subsidized upgrades?  Or should you move to a newer non contract, non subsidy plan?

 

AJ

 

With the plan that I have, they do offer upgrades for a reduced rate for the phone, I just decided not utilize them.  This way I am not locked into another contract for two years.  I do not plan to step away from Sprint but if I have to, I have the ability to do so without penalty.

[dedub]

Of course, I am a consumer, who wants to pay more and more and more for the same service?

 

if you want to pay more, more power to you, I suggest you double your payment to sprint and tell them to keep it as a tip.

 

I'm on an everything data plan (subsidized), and the $50 iphone specific plan (non-subsidized).

 

on per monthly basis, the ED $70 plan equals the $50+$20 (for 6/16 I believe, I actually pay $35 for 6+/64).

 

If all non-subsidized plans were on an equal basis (or better) deal than the contract plans, I likely wouldn't be commenting.

 

However as you well realize, most of the non-contract plans are simply price hikes in disguise.

 

Ergo, the carrier benefits, not the consumer. Even if the prices of devices plummet, the price of the service is going up. Competition at work?

 

I do agree that the separation of service versus device puts pressure on device prices, however see for example the price of all technology (tablets/computers/tvs/microwaves/etc etc) in the last several decades has continued to decrease as time goes on, irrespective of contracts or lack thereof.

[Ascertion]

 

Ergo, the carrier benefits, not the consumer. Even if the prices of devices plummet, the price of the service is going up. Competition at work?

 

I do agree that the separation of service versus device puts pressure on device prices, however see for example the price of all technology (tablets/computers/tvs/microwaves/etc etc) in the last several decades has continued to decrease as time goes on, irrespective of contracts or lack thereof.

The thing I really dislike about the no-contract, no subsidy stuff is that it is essentially a contract.  (Instead of ETF, it's whatever's left on the device owed.)  People that state otherwise really don't get it.  Also, in context of my current situation, if I left my subsidized plan, my bill would be about the same monthly per line of service...but...the phones would no longer be included!  That means each line would be the typical ~$50/line + phone finance per month.  Whereas now, it's about $50/line with subsidies!  And every case of the carriers removing subsidies only shows price hikes.  Literally there is no reason to "celebrate" that Verizon/AT&T and even Sprint are dropping subsidies.  They're masking their price hikes with no contract nonsense.

[Fraydog]

 

 

FrontPageTech is finding a lot of the same things that I'm finding in retail stores - If you want a Sprint contract, get them while you still can. 

[utiz4321]

 

 

 

FrontPageTech is finding a lot of the same things that I'm finding in retail stores - If you want a Sprint contract, get them while you still can.

So his report is I don't know.

[Rocket87]

I can tell you what it going on. Sprint doesnt pay third party dealer agents crap for 2 year contracts so they tell employees not to do them and send them away because it negatively effects every metric.

 

They then go to corporate store where we are hitting 80-90% lease/easy pay sales and we get paid x3 as much for each phone upgrade sale on lease instead of 2 year from the sales rep, to the store manager, all the way up to them DMs. That is why they are getting told this stuff. Sprint is doing everything it can to get employees to not do 2 year contracts.

 

All new customers are used to the new way of buying phones and all the plans and deals like etf are based on unsubsidized.

 

 

Sent from my SM-N910P using Tapatalk

[thefisch6]

 

 

FrontPageTech is finding a lot of the same things that I'm finding in retail stores - If you want a Sprint contract, get them while you still can.

So would this be getting rid of subsidized handset pricing even for existing customers, or is this only with regard to new customers?

[jroepcke51]

So would this be getting rid of subsidized handset pricing even for existing customers, or is this only with regard to new customers?

I take it from the video that it is only new customers. I prefer subsidized pricing model for myself and my plan so lets hope my assumption does not include existing contracts/customers.