How long till cell phone data gets cheaper?? Especially Verizon

[destrekor]

If we didn't have subsidized phones and phone contracts, both phone prices and plans would be cheaper. The reason unsubsidized phones cost so much is because they want you locked in a contract. If we didn't have subsidized phones, phone prices would drop really fast down to the level people could afford. It's almost criminal new phones are being released at $700+ when cost to build is $250-300. No way prices and margin could stay that high if phones weren't being subsidized.

That's what they cost everywhere, even with carriers that don't have subsidies.
What a manufacturer charges has nothing to do with the sub/unsub argument, because manufacturers are not pricing according to the whim of the carriers, they are pricing for themselves and for retail - of course retail gets a cut when considering MSRP... if there were no subsidized phones in the US, well, MSRP wouldn't change one bit... but increasing competition with everyone offering the same phone at the full price, that would of course result in sales (like any retail market).
Phone prices won't change unless the actual manufacturers charge less, but that isn't happening.

 

[RaistlinZ]

There is limited spectrum available. The price for data will only get more expensive with time, sorry.

 

[the DRIZZLE]

I actually do think it will get cheaper, at least at the family plan level. In the long run competition and the move to shared buckets of limited data on family plans will bring prices down somewhat.

 

[the DRIZZLE]

There is limited spectrum available. The price for data will only get more expensive with time, sorry.

True but we are improving how efficiently we use spectrum.

 

[destrekor]

Remember, spectrum is only one part of the picture.

Total available bandwidth and data capability are not solely restrained by wireless spectrum; on the contrary, physical media limitations are the main restraint in the US. To a point, the US will always be behind in that aspect, as it is far more costly to "widen the pipes" with the geographical and regional population spread that we have when you compare our situation with that of other, more dense population regions found elsewhere in the world. That, and our corporations are greedy fucks.

But in essence, solving spectrum issues won't magically fix bandwidth restraints - for that, each cell site needs a wider backbone and physical media limitations must be improved.

And of course, we'll all foot the bill for that... never mind the fact that we've been footing the bill for everything, instead of net revenues taking short-term nosedives on a regular basis. Verizon managed to do that for us... briefly. But then they freaked and figured they could recover revenue faster by enlisting our wallets. (Not that Verizon is unique here - they simply have consistently spent far more on wireless network technology and coverage... iirc).

 

[AstroManLuca]

The typical subsidy based contract transforms the subscriber to Monica Bellucci in "Irreversible", stuck in loop for 2 years.

For those that haven't seen that scene from the movie, US cellphone subscribers are raped but they seem to like it because they come back for more. Expecting lower data prices (or any other kind of price drops) equates to expecting the rapist to let the victim go before he is "finished" with her.

Buy a device outright or put it on the credit card and tell the telcos to f off. Until consumers do, US mobile business will keep the status quo with watered down competition in which the majority of cost of competing is passed onto the consumers anyway.

Too bad doing that just costs hundreds of dollars more with zero benefit.

What are you going to do with a no-contract smartphone anyway, sell it? Then why buy it in the first place? Take it to another carrier? That doesn't work either; Sprint and VZ won't activate each others' phones, and ATT and T-Mobile use different frequencies. And even if you could take it to another carrier, you're just picking who gets to rape you.

 

[Fire&Blood]

0 benefit? I was on a 2yr subsidized plan at ~$74. I did 3/4th of my time so they let me out on good behavior. My dad passed away 3 months ago, so I added my mom to my account, because I dropped subsidy I pay ~$85 for both of us for unltd minutes and texting and 2GB of data, before that I had 300 minutes witl the rest unltd as well.

What I'm gonna do with a no contract smartphone? How about use it as long as possible and yes, eventually try to sell it. What are you going to do with your contracted smartphone?

I happen to have a smartphone that's fully compatible but I'll forfeit that compatibility for the best value. I have no other options so I'll hang onto the partial GSM compatibility.

The cost of service has nothing to do with value, it's priced at what you as a consumer will tolerate. It's up to me to reduce that cost as much as possible.

 

[pandemonium]

One reason I'm glad I'm grandfathered in with the $15/month [real] unlimited plan with AT&T. Swap SIM card and done. Not that I merit paying more than that with my usage right now, but you know...just in case I need to use my phone as a modem when the home connection goes out...among other reasons.

 

[T_Yamamoto]

Won't get cheaper. Luckily my dad and I got unlimited data on our ogd1s and it got grandfathered. My brother got a Samsung stratosphere and he only gets 4gb data and he uses it all.lolol.

 

[soccerballtux]

cheaper is unlikely for a while considering the $XX billions they've spent on the network infrastructure for 4G. What's more likely to happen is you'll get more data for your money in the next 5 years. When Verizon deploys LTE-Advanced, there will be ~1Gbps of bandwidth per tower available.
That's going to be more than enough to go around, so we'll probably see the return of unlimited plans from them then.

That said there is a user here, I don't remember who, who pays for the "unlimited" 10GB (or whatever) plan + the "unlimited" tethering plan, with unlimited minutes and unlimited texts on Verizon, pays $110-120 / month or something and dropped his cable internet line. He uses 80-90GB/month tethering and hasn't once been bothered by them.

 

[soccerballtux]

Dunno, SMS prices haven't gone down much since their inception, which even today cost anywhere between $20/mo to $2.5million/GB. 🙂

on the other hand, this is a great point in contrast of my post above this one.
The SMS texting cost staying the same is because of the oligopoly that exists in the Cellular market.
That said, there are plenty of unlimited minutes/texting/data (with "unlimited" aka 2GB data) plans that can be had...metroPCS, VirginMobile, StraightTalk, etc.

 

[soccerballtux]

If we didn't have subsidized phones and phone contracts, both phone prices and plans would be cheaper. The reason unsubsidized phones cost so much is because they want you locked in a contract. If we didn't have subsidized phones, phone prices would drop really fast down to the level people could afford. It's almost criminal new phones are being released at $700+ when cost to build is $250-300. No way prices and margin could stay that high if phones weren't being subsidized.

the main reason is nobody wants to pay the $600 for the phone. People in Europe don't have a problem with this but for whatever reason Americans absolutely hate it. $200-300 is the max Americans are willing to pay, not matter how much money it saves them over the life of the contract.

 

[soccerballtux]

Remember, spectrum is only one part of the picture.

Total available bandwidth and data capability are not solely restrained by wireless spectrum; on the contrary, physical media limitations are the main restraint in the US. To a point, the US will always be behind in that aspect, as it is far more costly to "widen the pipes" with the geographical and regional population spread that we have when you compare our situation with that of other, more dense population regions found elsewhere in the world. That, and our corporations are greedy fucks.

But in essence, solving spectrum issues won't magically fix bandwidth restraints - for that, each cell site needs a wider backbone and physical media limitations must be improved.

And of course, we'll all foot the bill for that... never mind the fact that we've been footing the bill for everything, instead of net revenues taking short-term nosedives on a regular basis. Verizon managed to do that for us... briefly. But then they freaked and figured they could recover revenue faster by enlisting our wallets. (Not that Verizon is unique here - they simply have consistently spent far more on wireless network technology and coverage... iirc).

the backbone issues are fixed, they've laid fiber lines to all the towers that deserve one. The ones way out in the boondocks get LTE repeaters to towers that have their own backbone.
Speaking of Verizon, AT&T here. Sprint has backhaul issues, T-mobile seems to be doing pretty well, and MetroPCS just has all kinds of issues.

 

[pandemonium]

the main reason is nobody wants to pay the $600 for the phone. People in Europe don't have a problem with this but for whatever reason Americans absolutely hate it. $200-300 is the max Americans are willing to pay, not matter how much money it saves them over the life of the contract.

I think it's because of two main reasons:

• Americans are typically shortsighted. Most can't see more than 15 feet in front of them while driving, much less budget appropriately for the month when getting the nails did, hair did, face did, dogshittaco
• Being content with something that isn't brand spanking new is a concept that eludes most

That said, I'll be happy to break the mold. So far, over 3 years I've spent ~$900 on my unlocked E71 (phone cost and data costs). If I were to buy a locked one, my expenses would total ~$1180 right now (given that it would cost $100 for the phone from the provider - which it never was available, only the E71x, so likely more since I bought it before the 'x' hit the shelves).

 

[Tsaico]

I think it will get cheaper overall. Like how long distance was a different rate before on your land line. Then it became just minutes regardless of local or long distance, now generally all the land lines I have seen are flat rate unlimited. Cell became cheaper by doing things like free nights and weekends to just more minutes usable no matter when it was. Data on a smartphone is still relatively new being about five years ish and I would guess less than half of all cells are the droids/iPhone type.
But I do agree it is costing me a lot for mobile data. I pay 80 for the voice, another 30 for the data part, then another 40 to have a mobile WiFi hotspot thingy. And about half my allotted usage isnt used at all.

 

[Brian Stirling]

I think the price per MB will go down but not for a while. I see a time when there will be micro-cellular in many buildings increasing the available bandwidth making the cost to deliver a MB less.

OTH, data use will continue to increase so what you pay per month is unlikely to go down. The advertised price for service is only part of the total cost with all the added fees etc. and just as banks have increased the profit they make from each customer by adding fees the cellular industry is likely to follow suit. The government has not done much to reign in the fees in the banking industry so expect this to spread to other industries including cellular.


Brian

 

[v-600]

Slightly off topic, but I am genuinely interested. Living in the UK, the phone contract scene is very different. However I just renewed my phone contract with my provider for the third time after talking to their retentions department.

To cut a long story short, I stayed with them because they were willing to give me a bonus for staying. In my case, they added an extra 2gig of data allowance for no extra cost.

Is there a similar situation in the US where you can haggle for extra stuff on your contract if you stay with a carrier? Just reading through this no-body mentioned it, but that could be either that it doesn't happen, or it happens for everyone as a matter of course so isn't worth the mention.

EIther way, as I stated, I'm just curious.

 

[wirednuts]

not in my experience. with cabletv, yes, you can get free stuff all the time. but phones? not really. at best they "waive the fake activation fee" 🙄

i actually do think data rates will go down. we will allocate more spectrum to mobile broadband and increase the native speeds to a point where most people will probably get online through wireless, even for things like netflix and gaming.

 

[Geekbabe]

Too bad doing that just costs hundreds of dollars more with zero benefit.

What are you going to do with a no-contract smartphone anyway, sell it? Then why buy it in the first place? Take it to another carrier? That doesn't work either; Sprint and VZ won't activate each others' phones, and ATT and T-Mobile use different frequencies. And even if you could take it to another carrier, you're just picking who gets to rape you.

I use a phone till a newer device I want comes along, I sell the old one to defray the cost of my upgrade. What do i get out of it? The ability to change devices & carriers at will without paying any sort of penalty. I also have no worries about being locked into an expensive 2 year contract should I lose my job & suffer other life changing events.

 

[dagamer34]

Hmm. What do you talk on then?

Skype.

 

[Pliablemoose]

The major carriers will be dropping the unlimited portions of the grandfathered plans with the lawsuits that will be coming, and give everyone a chance to break their contracts, and the data prices will continue to climb...

 

[Specop 007]

The amount of total possible capacity a cellular carrier can have is very finite while the amount of capacity being used is increasing extremely fast. We all know what happens when a limited resource is in absurdly high demand.

Theres already solutions in place. Wifi offload for one. Aside from that however I would be keenly interested in seeing carrier network saturation levels. I am highly doubtful that networks are at capacity right now. In fact I would suspect they have room to grow.

I dont put weight in the idea of using pricing to control a finite resource when discussing cell networks. At least not without some solid facts behind it.

 

[mammador]

Get a mobile broadband hotspot. The cost may be the same, and you may get higher bandwidth.

 

[zerocool84]

Verizon/AT&T consistently pull in record profits numbers. They have the money to expand, they obviously don't want to. I definitely believe that AT&T and Verizon are colluding with each other to keep prices the way they are while offering less.

 

[dguy6789]

Theres already solutions in place. Wifi offload for one. Aside from that however I would be keenly interested in seeing carrier network saturation levels. I am highly doubtful that networks are at capacity right now. In fact I would suspect they have room to grow.

I dont put weight in the idea of using pricing to control a finite resource when discussing cell networks. At least not without some solid facts behind it.

A wifi supplement is a joke of an idea to be quite honest. Care to share some of the other solutions you had in mind?

It doesn't matter if you put weight behind the idea of supply and demand or not.