Jump to content

Sprint CEO says he may drop phone subsidies in 2015


joshnys8913
 Share

Recommended Posts

People refuse to do edge and next every day. I see it and hear its because they dont want to pay the full cost of the phone. Even if you tell the average customer the truth of it all they still will go with the subsidiary phone. People even have switched carriers because so and so forced their Next, Edge, and pay for your phone each month plan. The market isnt ready to completely abandon the 2 yr subsidized phone plan just yet.

 

Yes, but what will happen the day Edge, Next, Easy-Pay, (whatever the hell T-Mo calls it) is the only option available?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, but what will happen the day Edge, Next, Easy-Pay, (whatever the hell T-Mo calls it) is the only option available

People will be unhappy. I can guarantee one of the big two if not both will still offer these subsidized phones. It will bring people over from the others that dont offer two year contracts. Unless there is a much larger movement the big 2 will keep subsidized devices. Also we have been through this before with talks of removing subsidies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

People will be unhappy. I can guarantee one of the big two if not both will still offer these subsidized phones. It will bring people over from the others that dont offer two year contracts. Unless there is a much larger movement the big 2 will keep subsidized devices. Also we have been through this before with talks of removing subsidies.

People who can't add will be unhappy. AT&T for one wants to move to unsubsidized phones and is making a big push to educate customers in the differences. For the most part it is working for them quite well.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sprint CEO says he may lose my account in 2015

 

No 2-year contract, no sale. I have no interest in a rate hike, which is what it would end up being for me.

This is coming to all carrier's.Your only choice will be pre-paid they make you pay for the phone's already.Any top notch one's.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

People who can't add will be unhappy. AT&T for one wants to move to unsubsidized phones and is making a big push to educate customers in the differences. For the most part it is working for them quite well.

Every person I see upgrading and using next is more confused than before. Their pricing scheme makes no sense even after explained.  I just tell people if they save money or not because thats what they wanna hear. Ever customer that get offered these plans gets furious that they are trying to force them by paying for the full phone cost , even if the subsidized phone cost is baked into their plan, and the new model keeps them seperate. People are more confused than ever in this market.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Corporations change the business model to make more money. Sprint would only do this if it made them more money. They dont care if it cuts into your wallet, or the hardware manufacturers wallet. And I say that's good for them, thats business. You don't run a business to make less money than possible.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Boohooo. Tmobile doesnt offer contracts anymore and it doesnt seem to be stunting their growth. This change would bring simplicity to the plan offerings. And if they keep bringing us aggressively retail prices on certain smartphones, there will always be an option for the penny pinchers.

 

This would also help evolve the industry as a whole if two carriers went strictly no contract

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Boohooo. Tmobile doesnt offer contracts anymore and it doesnt seem to be stunting their growth. This change would bring simplicity to the plan offerings. And if they keep bringing us aggressively retail prices on certain smartphones, there will always be an option for the penny pinchers.

 

This would also help evolve the industry as a whole if two carriers went strictly no contract

It just shows that data performance is more important to the users than pricing. That and probably phone availability. T-Mobile can activate just about any phone on their network, while the rest lock down there phones tightly (well, at least the CDMA carriers.)

 

Sent from my LG-LS980

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So essentially people had their plans switched to new plans, and lose their subsidy? I wasn't quite sure what T-Mo did in that regard. Say I was a legacy customer, who's 2 year term was up, and you're saying I would be migrated over to a Simple Choice Classic plan, regardless of what plan I had before, with whatever perks, data limits, etc.?

T-Mobile's billing system will attempt to provide a discount to match the pricing of the overall account within $1-2 per month if it had to rise, or choose an option that would drop the price radically, and it would attempt to match plan configurations to get as close as possible to a Simple Choice plan. It would then notify you of the upcoming change. Depending on how the system calculates your configuration and situation, you'll be given a Simple Choice Classic or Simple Choice Value plan.

 

Originally, you always got Simple Choice Classic (which is the same as Simple Choice Value, except JUMP and EIP aren't available because you have subsidy instead), though now you may get Simple Choice Value and an even more substantial discount to bring it below your old pricing with the subsidy cost factored out.

 

At this point (with the newer billing system), it may just default to Simple Choice Value now.

 

It just shows that data performance is more important to the users than pricing. That and probably phone availability. T-Mobile can activate just about any phone on their network, while the rest lock down there phones tightly (well, at least the CDMA carriers.)

 

Sent from my LG-LS980

 

The problem with eliminating subsidization for Sprint is that there's no major benefit to the consumer to do so. Sprint's network is very tightly locked down (as all CDMA carriers are) and you can only use Sprint devices approved and activated by Sprint anyway. Sprint devices aren't usable with other carriers by design, so it has low resale value. On top of it, the 3G and 4G network performance isn't quite to the level of other carriers (AT&T and T-Mobile's 3G networks offer nearly 30 times the average performance of Sprint's, most carriers offer double the 4G data performance of Sprint, and eCSFB continues to create problems with voice calls).

 

At the end of the day, it's very difficult for Sprint to make itself look appealing.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 On top of it, the 3G and 4G network performance isn't quite to the level of other carriers (AT&T and T-Mobile's 3G networks offer nearly 30 times the average performance of Sprint's, most carriers offer double the 4G data performance of Sprint, and eCSFB continues to create problems with voice calls).

 

At the end of the day, it's very difficult for Sprint to make itself look appealing.

 Except if you live in a totally mature B41 deployed market where Sprint is not only competitive, but handily beats ATT, Tmobile and matches Verizon (and surpass them once B41+CA phones become commonplace.)

 

I do agree with you on the 3G sentiment for the most part, but in a place where the network is mostly deployed, 3G really isn't much of an issue.

 

Same goes for eCSFB, it becomes an issue of the past once everything is deployed (like in NYC) and optimized properly.

 

Hopefully this stuff happens all over the US sooner than later.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

NYC is a prime example of a dense Band 41 deployment and Sprint is taking it further by adding infill sites where necessary. Sprint is probably going to aim for Japan like experience (super dense deployment) not too far off from now.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Every person I see upgrading and using next is more confused than before. Their pricing scheme makes no sense even after explained. I just tell people if they save money or not because thats what they wanna hear. Ever customer that get offered these plans gets furious that they are trying to force them by paying for the full phone cost , even if the subsidized phone cost is baked into their plan, and the new model keeps them seperate. People are more confused than ever in this market.

Then your not explaining it right. People have always paid full price for their phone. The old pricing plans had the handset subsity built into then, now they removed that from the plans and you can choose when to put a phone payment in. This is the line used by a really good rep. I know and his customer understand what is happening and the plans.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Then your not explaining it right. People have always paid full price for their phone. The old pricing plans had the handset subsity built into then, now they removed that from the plans and you can choose when to put a phone payment in. This is the line used by a really good rep. I know and his customer understand what is happening and the plans.

When we explain it exactly how the ATT rep says and tells us to explain, then it falls back on ATT. When we tell the usually person this same line they feel like they are getting charged more. They see they pay $700 for a phone, instead of $199. They lose all interest at this point. It is a numbers gain and seeing a huge number like $700 is a turn off for consumers who are used to seeing below $200.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Then your not explaining it right. People have always paid full price for their phone. The old pricing plans had the handset subsity built into then, now they removed that from the plans and you can choose when to put a phone payment in. This is the line used by a really good rep. I know and his customer understand what is happening and the plans.

Last week I went to Sprint for something and there was a family of 4 porting in. As soon as they found out they had to pay installment billing for their phones, they had a fit and walked out. It's a shame too. In the end, people really don't understand and never will until subsidized pricing is gone forever. Then hopefully we will finally have lower pricing on flagship phones, but that may take time to happen.

 

 

Sent from Josh's iPhone 6+ using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know if that's how the subsidy model started.

 

And what you are saying is cell service stores and cell phone hardware stores? Is that how it makes it more competitive?

 

 

Sent from Josh's iPhone 6+ using Tapatalk

My point wasn't about different stores or the same store, I am just saying hardware deals should be kept separate from service agreements because that is the basis of the subsidy model.  Simply just let the OEM's undercut each other and let the service providers undercut each other and that way the consumer will come out on top.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Last week I went to Sprint for something and there was a family of 4 porting in. As soon as they found out they had to pay installment billing for their phones, they had a fit and walked out. It's a shame too. In the end, people really don't understand and never will until subsidized pricing is gone forever. Then hopefully we will finally have lower pricing on flagship phones, but that may take time to happen.

 

 

Sent from Josh's iPhone 6+ using Tapatalk

maybe I am not seeing it, but if I walk into the store with a family of 4 and was given the option of having to shell out $199 x 4, full price on 4 phones or $0 down with installment , I would chose the installments. I wouldn't have walked out. And like Deval likes to say, "Where are they going to go"?

 

TS

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In my experience the only people that push back on subsidy/eib are current customers. All my new customers come in expecting or understanding some what that the phones are seperate because they have been in their companys store and the rep lead with next or edge or jump. Then they see sprints price or data double compares to what they were getting and sign up.

 

Plus if a new 4 line comes in and wants iphones there option is A) pay 800 up front amd 260/ mo unlimited. B ) pay zero up front and 280/ mo unlimited. Or C) pay zero upfront and 180/ mo until 2016 and after that 240/ mo and get 20gb.

 

 

Everyone picks option C.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

maybe I am not seeing it, but if I walk into the store with a family of 4 and was given the option of having to shell out $199 x 4, full price on 4 phones or $0 down with installment , I would chose the installments. I wouldn't have walked out. And like Deval likes to say, "Where are they going to go"?

 

TS

 

What if the phones are on sale by Amazon or Best Buy or Target and you're paying $00.00* in store and an additional 00.00 over two years? And Target throws in a $50.00 gift card?

 

 

*In California you still pay tax on the full value of the phone.

 

That's a lot more interesting than "wait, you're telling me I have to pay $27.12 on TOP of the service cost....PER PHONE, every month!?!?"

 

Maybe I havent been paying attention, but I see a lot more competition and sale pricing on the subsidized phones than the easy-pay model. I always buy a top of the line phone and Ive never payed more than 49.99 due to sales.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Last week I went to Sprint for something and there was a family of 4 porting in. As soon as they found out they had to pay installment billing for their phones, they had a fit and walked out. It's a shame too. In the end, people really don't understand and never will until subsidized pricing is gone forever. Then hopefully we will finally have lower pricing on flagship phones, but that may take time to happen.

 

 

Sent from Josh's iPhone 6+ using Tapatalk

Again that goes back to the rep. I have seen it done and have used his line to explain it to people in personal circles and it works. Once people understand that they always paid for the phone, it was just hidden in the plan they get it. People aren't stupid they are just ignorant and that is where education comes in and from what I have seen from Att their reps do a great job.
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What if the phones are on sale by Amazon or Best Buy or Target and you're paying $00.00* in store and an additional 00.00 over two years? And Target throws in a $50.00 gift card?

 

 

*In California you still pay tax on the full value of the phone.

 

That's a lot more interesting than "wait, you're telling me I have to pay $27.12 on TOP of the service cost....PER PHONE, every month!?!?"

 

Maybe I havent been paying attention, but I see a lot more competition and sale pricing on the subsidized phones than the easy-pay model. I always buy a top of the line phone and Ive never payed more than 49.99 due to sales.

I no the math doesn't work out for you, but if sprint continued the plan you are on and countinued to offer subsidies on it they would fold. Enjoy the gravy train while you can it is going away.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


×
×
  • Create New...