utiz4321

I didn't know PA bordered Canada or Mexico.

The time table for NV has not change since the last time sprint revised it six months or so ago. I am personally expecting them to push back the completion date, but that is nothing more than a guess and I might happily be disappointed.

yes the rep is wrong. you do not need to use one up on both lines, unless your wife's line is not eligible for the standard discount. Sprint is allowing people no eligible for two year pricing to be eligible for one up. he was also wrong about you keeping your discount. however your discount will be less, currently if you are on everything data you are receiving your discount off of 110 of your bill. under the new plan you will receive your discount off of 60. so yeah the rep you spoke to didn't have a good understanding of one up or was being dishonest.

First, why would the one up plan cost 30 dollars more? Second you can do next for your phone and not your wife's. Further two years from now you more than likely will not get 350 for you wife's phone unless she goes with an iPhone and that still might be pushing it. One up makes it more expensive to leave sprint, but a 200 dollar phone on a two year contract should only be 12 bucks a month, that is 27 (equipment cost) -15 service credit=12

Moffett has been wrong on on just about everything he has ever said about sprint. Why papers still choose to listen to him is beyond me. However, one point he makes is valid sprint's network is not as good as tmobile in most places and is either the same cost or cost more depending on the plan customers need. I don't agree that price is king yet and probably won't be anytime soon but sprint needs to be competing on price until NV is further along.

Not to long ago, I did it about three weeks ago or so.

Insurance is separate. Tmobile wins on price and in most places network right now.

At 20 months you can keep your phone.

Exactly and for 2.6 to be fully deployed. Remember original nv plans had 2.6 deployed only in high traffic areas since the clear purchase it has been extend to across the network. Further, to get similar coverage, especially in building to sprints other frequencies they'll need more cell sites and that takes time.

Mergers between large utility companies is rarely good for the consumer or employees. A three player oligopoly isn't much better than a duopololy and looking at markets such as the UK, Japan, Germany and other developed countries four major players seem to be the norm (and those markets are smaller). Tmobile and sprint both have large spectrum positions and more spectrum is being made avalible (slowly), so I don't the advantage to the consumer. Tmobile and sprint share holders however do have great benefits to a merger happening, prices will likely rise and margins expand with is good for them.

Insurance makes slightly less sense on one up at least after 8 months or so. Since you are paying down the phone the risk you are hedging is less as the months go on. So if some thing happen to you phone at the 8 month mark for the insurance and deductible you would have paid 288. With no insurance you could pay off the phone and do the next again for 434. Your hedging a risk of 145. For me I wouldn't carry insurance past the 6 month mark but then again I never do insurance any way.

I have been through both San Diego and the Bay Area, both markets only partially complete but further along than Phoenix and the difference is night and day. Even when I was in 3G areas the network preformed well above what it does here, rarely did I have data issues. The one exception to this was in down town SF where lte was useless but when I switched to 3G the speed where good for evdo. I don't have speed test from my trip because I didn't really take any, I was more worried about usability.

Yes I read the article. But nothing in it changes what I said. You do spend more with ATT and vzw, you are paying a premium. The author is comparing the cost over two years in that time frame a next, jump, edge or one up customer would have had two phones and be able to get their third. For ATT 324+324=648 which is the difference. A tradition customer would only had one or if he want two it would be 236+650-what ever he could sell the old phone for or it's trade in value. My comment was directed towards your claim that ATT and Verizon plans don't offer anything good for the customer. That is not true a customer pays a premium to upgrade early but they get to with out having to participate on the secondary phone market and when you compare other avenues to getting a phone every year the premium is not all that high. If you want to make you cell phone bill as cheap as possible don't get a smart phone, text and never upgrade your phone. It is another service, just like smart phone data and texting there is a cost to it, that doesn't mean there is no value in it.

That is not true. Customers do pay a premium on both vzw plan and ATT but they do get benefits. For example on Att next a traditional upgrade to an iPhone 5s (or most high end phones) 236 (200+36 upgrade fee). Under next at the 12 month mark a customer would have paid 27*12=324 for the same phone, that is an 88 dollar difference over a year. So the customer pays 7.33 a month so they can upgrade once a year vs every 24 months and don't have to come up with the money up front. Now we can talk about the benefits of sell you current device and buy retail all we want but for some customers that is something worth paying a little bit more so they won't have to do that, else carrier trade in programs wouldn't be so popular. Now sprint one up plan is better, a lot better as you are still getting a subsidy and the phone works out to be cheaper but now that their are not really (at least for large family plans, 1-2 lines they still are) they need something to show customers they are a value option.

I really can't imagine this is the case. Sprint is not Verizon I don't think they could pull this off with out being punished by losing customers. But then again I didn't think they would raise prices after the SoftBank merger but they did so ...

Not only are you paying the same price over the 24 months but you have the trade in option. Since I pads don't really hold there value it really is kind of a no brainer. One up is a much better way to by a tab.

I am replying from a phone so that is not an option for me. In any case your original post had both customers with out phones and one paying the remaining balance for no apparent reason. I did not say you where wrong I said you choose assumption that where made your comparison work out the way you wanted to. Comparing apples to apples 2yr phone 1 200 Phone 2 300 (650-350) Phone 3 -150 (200-350) Phone 4 300 (650-350) From then on 3 and 4 alternate One up Phone 1 144 Phone 2 144 Phone 3 144 Phone 4 144 Ect... This still is not counting the time cost of selling your phone. So stop where you want to make it come out the way you want. In any case no need to get so tilted over this. If you will sooth your ego.. You are right you are always right. Good?

It is more costly to leave sprint, but if you don't leave sprint you are wrong. You choose the one example that would make the traditional way more cheaper that one up. In any case 350 for a sold phone is not garrenteed and you assign no cost for the time and effort to sell your phone. This maybe a subjective cost but there is still a cost to it. One up is cheaper as long as you are staying with sprint and are going to keep using a cell phone. Both our maths are right are assumptions are different.

You only sell your phone once in two years period or you need to factor end the purchase of a new phone at the end of to years, assuming your not giving up cell phones at the end of two years. So either the calculation is 350/24= -15.58 making 103.26 on option two or you need to add another 8.33 (200 for new phone) making it 95.99 depending on weather you end the upgrade/sell you phone cycle befor or after the two years. Either way option one is cheaper and you don't have to sell your phone.

I know that ATT doesn't allow the next for business customers either. I am not sure about vzw but I seriously doubt it. Not sure what the logic is behind that.

From the leaked slides (nothing is official to my knowledge) you can sell you current 4s because this wasn't purchased under the one up program, you don't get the discounted pricing for bring your own phone (in fact the discount goes away after you pay off your one up phone) with vzw and AT&T you have the option of paying it off early and it looks like you can with sprint (but why, unless you are going to cancel service) and if it is like vzw and AT&T no etf just pay off the phone.

The new plans are a problem for the math if you have more than three phones, like me. This is why I am not going to use this option. But if you have 3 or fewer phones or are already on the new plans this is a better option.

What is the deal? I was eventually going to get around to fulfilling the premier requirements but thing keep piping up.

I think this deal is good and definitely the best in the industry. The worst case is you hold on to your for two years and you pay 88 more for it. 88 dollars over two years is not much of a down side. Now if you want to upgrade every year or there about there no cheaper way to do it. Say you buy an iPhone (199) in a year you could probably get 400 for it maybe 500 (it is an iPhone) and that only if you kept it in near perfect condition. So best case you are up 300 now your new phone is 650 so total cost to you is 350 for a new phone under the best case (all in a one year time frame and this doesn't take into account the cost of time selling your phone) Under the new program you spend 144 over a year and 288 over two years. Either way it is less than 350 and no time or effort to sell your phone. The last option is sprint's upgrade now option. At a year I think the fee is 150, so 199 for the first phone, second phone is 350 minus the trade in value which for iPhone is 270. 199+350-270=280.