Why was the news/media so misleading about phone prices?

[Wingznut]

Further, I have already proven to you that on Verizon you do get a different level of service with prepaid vs post paid, which invalidates the part in red.

Untrue. You claimed or tried to imply that Verizon didn't offer LTE on prepaid, I proved they do offer it, albeit in the form of access points rather than phones.

You don't think that LTE "in the form of access points rather than phones" is a completely different level of service?

Two years ago, I switched my family of four from Virgin Mobile to Sprint. The quality of service is definitely noticeable. With VM, we had plenty of missing texts and dropped calls. Perhaps that has changed in the last two years, or is better with another prepaid carrier. But I'd rather not spend $1500-2000 on phones this winter (when I upgrade all phones) to find out.

Currently, I pay a little less than $200/mo for four smartphones (unlimited talk/text/data.) So, feel free to do the math on what kind of phone I could pay full price for and still come out ahead on the prepaid plan.

Correct me if I am wrong... But the $30/month plan only allows for 100 minutes of talk and up to 5gb of data. That is certainly not the same level of service.


Anyway, the point is... Yes, prepaid is certainly worth it for some. But for others, a discounted phone on contract makes more sense.

 

[Chiropteran]

You don't think that LTE "in the form of access points rather than phones" is a completely different level of service?

The reason they do not claim to offer LTE for their prepaid plan is that the prepaid phone they offer doesn't have an LTE radio. I don't think the prepaid service actually has any material difference from the standard contract service, but they can't advertise it as having LTE since the phone they offer doesn't support LTE. This is further supported by the fact that they let you use LTE on a prepaid plan when you are using an access point, which supports LTE.

If the day comes where Verizon offers as prepaid phone with LTE support which can't actually use LTE on a prepaid plan, I will admit I am wrong. But do you honestly think that will happen? There is no difference between prepaid and contract service except for the artificial differences created by the limited selections of phone on prepaid.

Currently, I pay a little less than $200/mo for four smartphones (unlimited talk/text/data.) So, feel free to do the math on what kind of phone I could pay full price for and still come out ahead on the prepaid plan.

Correct me if I am wrong... But the $30/month plan only allows for 100 minutes of talk and up to 5gb of data. That is certainly not the same level of service.

Can you link to the deal you are getting? $50/month for unlimited everything per phone on contract sounds amazing. Perhaps the bulk discounts at 4+ devices start to make sense.

I used T-Mobile as an example because that is what the article was talking about, but straight talk and virgin mobile offer similar deals with options to add a lot more minutes or simply unlimited talk time if you need it. As far as the data, 5GB is a lot more than verizon or AT&T offer at any reasonable price, if you really need more than 5GB every month you have an awfully specific need and you might be better off using sprint since AFAIK they are the only provider offering true unlimited data.

 

[Capt Caveman]

Is the OP just shilling for TMobile?

Anyway, TMobile's postpaid plans sound great except they have a huge black hole of coverage around my area which makes their service unusable. So it's definitely a YMMV situation with them.

He's a known troll. Even though it's been proven that you don't receive the same service(ie. no LTE with prepaid), he will continue to troll. Just report the thread.

 

[Chiropteran]

He's a known troll. Even though it's been proven that you don't receive the same service(ie. no LTE with prepaid), he will continue to troll. Just report the thread.

Why do you continue to spread lies? I'm not trolling, but when you and others continually post stuff that isn't true I feel compelled to respond and correct you.

 

[kubani1]

I am reposting this, as this seems to me to be the real difficulty everyone is having.

Yes, in this isolated instance it is much much less expensive to buy the iPhone outright, but your thread title is "why is the news/media so misleading about phone prices"

Which suggests that perhaps this article is about more than just the iPhone and tmobile, I thought you were using it as one example.

I stand by this statement, everyone else is talking in general terms, and you are talking about a very particular and specific case.

Again, I would change the title of the thread because the title makes it seem like you are talking about phones and carriers in general

 

[Capt Caveman]

Why do you continue to spread lies? I'm not trolling, but when you and others continually post stuff that isn't true I feel compelled to respond and correct you.

You've stated that you can't get the same phones via prepaid as you can via contract. You've stated that you can't get LTE via prepaid as you can via contract. Conclusion: you're comparing apples vs oranges.

Thanks for trolling.

/thread

 

[Chiropteran]

You've stated that you can't get the same phones via prepaid as you can via contract. You've stated that you can't get LTE via prepaid as you can via contract. Conclusion: you're comparing apples vs oranges.

Thanks for trolling.

/thread

The thread was about t-mobile, and I used the iphone 5 as an example. Comparing iPhone5 to iPhone5 is apples to apples. You and deeko are the ones trying to pull in oranges to compare.

For reasons I cannot fathom, you and deeko seem to think that Verizon's terrible prepaid selection is somehow meaningful in this context. It's not. Apparently Verizon hates the idea of prepaid phone service and only offers one low-end phone that doesn't support LTE, but that really has no effect at all on anyone who uses a prepaid phone on any other service.

I'm just going to report your posts for trolling instead of replying if you continue you troll spam, so don't bother.

 

[Suspicious-Teach8788]

The reason they do not claim to offer LTE for their prepaid plan is that the prepaid phone they offer doesn't have an LTE radio. I don't think the prepaid service actually has any material difference from the standard contract service, but they can't advertise it as having LTE since the phone they offer doesn't support LTE. This is further supported by the fact that they let you use LTE on a prepaid plan when you are using an access point, which supports LTE.

You must be dense. Effectively your LTE is tied with that device, and I don't se people carrying the LTE access points around with them 24/7. so essentially it's like being tied down with a cord.

How can you even compare the both? Maybe you never step out of your house and work, but for those who go out with friends to get dinner, to do activities outside their house on the weekend, it's important to have LTE on the go.

I'm pretty sure 99% of the people agree that hving LTE on your phone is vastly different than an LTE hotspot. Who cares about an LTE hotspot. You might as well use your freaking Wifi at that point.

 

[Chiropteran]

You must be dense. Effectively your LTE is tied with that device, and I don't se people carrying the LTE access points around with them 24/7. so essentially it's like being tied down with a cord.

How can you even compare the both? Maybe you never step out of your house and work, but for those who go out with friends to get dinner, to do activities outside their house on the weekend, it's important to have LTE on the go.

I'm pretty sure 99% of the people agree that hving LTE on your phone is vastly different than an LTE hotspot. Who cares about an LTE hotspot. You might as well use your freaking Wifi at that point.

Are you not reading? Verizon offers ONE (1) smartphone for a prepaid plan. Only one. That phone doesn't have an LTE radio. Verizon can't advertise it's prepaid service as include LTE, because the phone doesn't have LTE.

This has NOTHING to do with it being a prepaid plan, and everything to do with it being a phone that doesn't support LTE. Verizon doesn't differentiate.

I know this, I had an original moto droid on verizon. No LTE. After two years, I upgraded to a droid bionic, which supports LTE. Even though I didn't change my plan, I was suddenly getting LTE speeds. LTE is determined by device, not your plan.

If you can show me a case where verizon has a 3g only service for LTE capable devices, I'll beleive you. But that doesn't exist! LTE service is determined by device, not your plan. End of story.

 

[antef]

I don't see how the lack of LTE makes the comparison apples to oranges. Yeah, obviously post-paid gets you LTE and roaming, no one is contesting that. The fact of the matter is, CDMA carriers need LTE because EVDO is so slow. Most people's needs would be met just fine with good HSPA 3G. So yes, if you need LTE, you can pay the price for it, that's fine. But if you're fine with 3-5 Mbps for half the price, as I bet millions of people would be, it's a pretty good trade-off.

Verizon uses this same strategy with FiOS - offer a great service, but also with a ridiculous price. For the privilege of using that LTE you get to pay $100+/mo for an individual and a locked phone that you can't just pop a random SIM into overseas (at least with AT&T, I'm assuming with Verizon it's the same). It's a pretty bad deal.

However, I noticed that once you get to 2+ lines, even the "bargain" carriers like Sprint start to cost $150, so at that point AT&T and Verizon may be better deals. But are you still dealing with locked phones and contracts.

For an individual, prepaid makes a ton of sense, even for an iPhone user.

 

[Suspicious-Teach8788]

I don't see how the lack of LTE makes the comparison apples to oranges. Yeah, obviously post-paid gets you LTE and roaming, no one is contesting that. The fact of the matter is, CDMA carriers need LTE because EVDO is so slow. Most people's needs would be met just fine with good HSPA 3G. So yes, if you need LTE, you can pay the price for it, that's fine. But if you're fine with 3-5 Mbps for half the price, as I bet millions of people would be, it's a pretty good trade-off.

Verizon uses this same strategy with FiOS - offer a great service, but also with a ridiculous price. For the privilege of using that LTE you get to pay $100+/mo for an individual and a locked phone that you can't just pop a random SIM into overseas (at least with AT&T, I'm assuming with Verizon it's the same). It's a pretty bad deal.

However, I noticed that once you get to 2+ lines, even the "bargain" carriers like Sprint start to cost $150, so at that point AT&T and Verizon may be better deals. But are you still dealing with locked phones and contracts.

For an individual, prepaid makes a ton of sense, even for an iPhone user.

Well there's also many reports of AT&T's Straight Talk limiting you to HSDPA and not giving you HSPA+ speeds. And obviously you lose LTE. I'm now using AT&T because it's a GSM provider and you can bring your own device.

Verizon is a piece of crap simply because they're CDMA operators and despite interoperability with Sprint EVDO phones they'll never let you activate one on their network. Meanwhile AT&T has no choice.

 

[Wingznut]

Can you link to the deal you are getting? $50/month for unlimited everything per phone on contract sounds amazing. Perhaps the bulk discounts at 4+ devices start to make sense./QUOTE]
It's just their standard family plan, minus a 20% corporate discount. And I misspoke about unlimited mins... It's actually 1500 mins/month.

 

[Chiropteran]

It's just their standard family plan, minus a 20% corporate discount. And I misspoke about unlimited mins... It's actually 1500 mins/month.

What provider?

 

[Wingznut]

What provider?

Sprint. (Sorry, didn't realize that I never mentioned that.)

Sent from my HTC Evo via Tapatalk

 

[Fx1]

I was reading an article about using the Iphone 5 on t-mobile, and it talks about how you need to pay the "steep" no-contract price for the phone. Never mind the fact that buying the phone on contract costs 2-3 times as much overall.

I mean, you don't see furniture articles talk about the "steep" price of a $400 sofa and implying that renting one for $50/month is a better deal, do they?

The news and media should inform readers, not put out misleading information. Those "steep" no contract prices + prepaid plans are almost universally a better deal than signing up for a contract.

The America phone market is so fucked up im surprised you have any idea what a phone really costs.

Its far more simple in the UK and we get better deals it seems.

 

[wirednuts]

W
$15 for 250 MB of data weekly
$60 for 3 GB of data monthly
$90 for 10 GB of data monthly

ugh.

attn: data providers. your product is not gold. its data. for $90 a month, there shouldnt be a limit.

 

[Chiropteran]

Sprint. (Sorry, didn't realize that I never mentioned that.)

I just checked it out, it's a pretty amazing deal if you are getting 4 or 5 lines. I wonder, is there any way they can actual enforce "family"? Why sign up for an individual plan when you could get a family plan with some friends and split the cost?

If I wanted an iPhone5 it looks like this would be the way to go.

 

[Fx1]

ugh.

attn: data providers. your product is not gold. its data. for $90 a month, there shouldnt be a limit.

in Uk i get:

2000 mins
5000 same network mins
5000 texts
UNLIMITED Data on HSDPA+
Free Samsung S3

£31 a month for 24 months

If this was a US Deal this would work out at $40 a month since you dont pay VAT.

 

[dagamer34]

in Uk i get:

2000 mins
5000 same network mins
5000 texts
UNLIMITED Data on HSDPA+
Free Samsung S3

£31 a month for 24 months

If this was a US Deal this would work out at $40 a month since you dont pay VAT.

You guys also pay a ton of taxes on just about everything else. So I think it all levels out in the end.

*Except for healthcare. We get majorly screwed there if a person in the US doesn't have insurance*

 

[Fx1]

You guys also pay a ton of taxes on just about everything else. So I think it all levels out in the end.

*Except for healthcare. We get majorly screwed there if a person in the US doesn't have insurance*

No doubt there is balance somewhere in the equation but it doesnt change the fact that the US Carriers are far to powerful and expensive for the service they provide.

Its a pitty they lobby the government so badly in the US and big business always wins over the little guy.

 

[modestninja]

No doubt there is balance somewhere in the equation but it doesnt change the fact that the US Carriers are far to powerful and expensive for the service they provide.

Its a pitty they lobby the government so badly in the US and big business always wins over the little guy.

While I agree that the US carriers are overpriced, comparing them to GB isn't a fair comparison. The population density is so much higher in GB that it makes it much easier to provide coverage and upgrade your network there. I would be curious to see the cost in somewhere like Canada or Australia compared to the US.