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

[God Mode]

Blame someone else like true Americans. Maybe the FCC or something.

 

[jpiniero]

If you can pay $80/month for a contract phone, you should be able to pay $30/month for a prepaid phone and put aside $50/month.

What $30 plan out there gets you voice+reasonable amount of data? It kind of defeats the purpose of having a smartphone with just WiFi.

 

[kubani1]

If you can pay $80/month for a contract phone, you should be able to pay $30/month for a prepaid phone and put aside $50/month. At the end of a 2 year period the smarter prepaid phone using you will have $1200 set aside for a new phone, which the other version of you on a $80 contract will have $0 saved and will be out another $199 to buy a new subsidized contract phone.

If you are really so poor and hard up that you can't pay for a $650 phone, you shouldn't have a cellphone service at all, you are throwing away thousands so you can save $450.

Well maybe the uk doesn't rip off customers as bad, but I spend about an extra £100 over the course of two years with my phone on contract, which in my mind is completely okay.

And no I cannot afford £400 on a phone, I live on a budget, but I use that phone for work, I literally cannot afford to not have a mobile phone.

I appreciate that you can afford a phone with no contract, I think it's great, but not all of us can do so, but I can afford my phone by effectively taking out a loan and repaying it over time, like many people do with computers, cars and homes.

 

[Chiropteran]

Its funny, for someone that was being really snarky about being "right" about Verizon's prepaid LTE, you sure are being smug about how much you don't care enough to do the research when you're proven wrong. I see a common factor....hmmm....

What?

You are the one coming into the thread talking about how there are all these difference between prepaid and postpaid service. So far, you have proven exactly ZERO differences.

After doing research and proving you wrong in multiple cases, while you provide zero evidence for any of your statements, I am going to act a little smug. 🙂

And if you REALLY want a direct response to the iPhone on T-Mobile, LTE still stands as a differentiating variable - if you buy it for $200 on AT&T postpaid, you get LTE. If you buy it for $700 and take it to T-Mobile, you do not.

Yeah okay, there are several problems with this statement.

First off, it's not true. T-mobile is going to have LTE shortly, "2013", which could mean in a few months or it could mean at the end of the year, but considering a 2 year contract time, you WILL be able to use an iPhone5 on t-mobile LTE before those 2 years are up.

Second, the correct comparison would be comparing T-Mobile prepaid to T-Mobile postpaid. Both have the exact same support for LTE.

Third, you are moving the goalposts. Instead of comparing prepaid and postpaid, you have decided to change the argument into AT&T vs T-Mobile. I don't deny that different service providers might offer different service, I never claimed otherwise. Good job at pointing out the obvious.

 

[Chiropteran]

What $30 plan out there gets you voice+reasonable amount of data? It kind of defeats the purpose of having a smartphone with just WiFi.

T-mobiles unlimited data and txts with 100 talk minutes is pretty popular, if you have a landline at work/home the 100 minutes is plenty, and even if you go over occasionally it's still a much better deal than postpaid contracts from at&t or verizon.

Well maybe the uk doesn't rip off customers as bad,

Either that, or the prepaid plans over there aren't as good. In any case I started the thread in the context of an article talking about t-mobile, where anyone buying a prepaid phone would be using it with one of t-mobile's prepaid plans starting at $30/month for unlimited txt and data.

 

[kubani1]

.

Third, you are moving the goalposts. Instead of comparing prepaid and postpaid, you have decided to change the argument into AT&T vs T-Mobile. I don't deny that different service providers might offer different service, I never claimed otherwise. Good job at pointing out the obvious.

I don't mean to sound smug, and I realise this might sound smug, is this thread about the perceived cost of phones, or about tmobile?

 

[kubani1]

Either that, or the prepaid plans over there aren't as good. In any case I started the thread in the context of an article talking about t-mobile, where anyone buying a prepaid phone would be using it with one of t-mobile's prepaid plans starting at $30/month for unlimited txt and data.

£15 for unlimited data, 300 min and 3000 texts, pay as you go

Roughly $25

 

[Chiropteran]

I don't mean to sound smug, and I realise this might sound smug, is this thread about the perceived cost of phones, or about tmobile?

I don't know if I wasn't clear enough or what, but I'll break it down to make it more clear. It *must* reference T-Mobile, because the price of contracts and prepaid deals vary from service to service.

1- You can either pay $650 or $199 for an iphone5, depending on if you want it with contract or prepaid.

2- If you buy it on contract, you are paying $80+ per month to verizon, sprint, or AT&T.

3- If you buy it outright, and use it on T-Mobile, you can pay $30/month.

$50 less per month times 24 months= $1200 saved. Extra $450 upfront, save $1200 over the contract period, which choice is cheaper?

The article in question was specifically referring to t-mobile and the "steep" $650 cost for a phone if you wanted to use it with t-mobile's prepaid plans.

Do you agree that it's deceptive to imply that the phone costs so much more with t-mobile, when the actual total 2-year cost is significantly less?

 

[Chiropteran]

£15 for unlimited data, 300 min and 3000 texts, pay as you go

Roughly $25

That is insane compared to the prices here.

2 year contract would only be a total of ~$600. What do you pay upfront when you sign up? I can't see how a cellular provider could give you a $650 phone and only charge you $600 over the next two years and remain in business. Assuming the charge you something upfront, it still seems like they are basically giving you service for nothing.

 

[antef]

Quoting $700 phone prices to make the case for buying on-contract is being a little disingenuous. You can buy a Galaxy Nexus for $350. Even when the phone was only 6 months old it sold for $400. If you're buying a brand new device for $600-700, that's your own fault. Electronics depreciate so fast, it makes no sense, and you don't need it on launch day. So that's only $150-200 more than an on-contract price, so it's far from a deal-breaker and still easy to get substantial savings.

If you want Verizon or AT&T, you might as well sign the contract and get the subsidy. But if prepaid meets your needs, and I bet it does for many people that don't realize it, the savings can be substantial. You're talking $45/month for something like Straight Talk compared to $90/month on Verizon or AT&T, plus taxes and fees. What does Straight Talk get you? Unlimited talk, unlimited text, unlimited web browsing on AT&T's 3G network. You will also be able to stream music and the like, just have to stay within reasonable limits. Perfectly adequate service unless you want to stream HD movies every single day or absolutely need LTE.

 

[Deeko]

What?

You are the one coming into the thread talking about how there are all these difference between prepaid and postpaid service. So far, you have proven exactly ZERO differences.

After doing research and proving you wrong in multiple cases, while you provide zero evidence for any of your statements, I am going to act a little smug. 🙂

Read the first link in the first result of your cute little LMGTFY -

Verizon Wireless today announced the availability of a new prepaid plan beginning May 1, offering unlimited talk and text messaging, as well as 1 GB of data for $80 per month. This monthly plan, available on the prepaid Samsung Illusion™, provides customers with an affordable, flexible option to take advantage of the nation’s largest, most reliable 3G network without the commitment of an annual contract. The Samsung Illusion prepaid package will also be available in Verizon Wireless Communications Stores and online at www.verizonwireless.com for $169.99. In the coming weeks, the Samsung Illusion prepaid is also available at Best Buy®, Target®, RadioShack and Walmart.

You will note that it explicitly says "3G NetworK" and does not mention LTE - so no, they do not offer LTE prepaid smartphone plans, it would seem. And even if that $80 plan were, in fact, LTE, I already showed you how buying a phone full price and utilizing that plan would actually put you at a disadvantage both short and long term vs Verizon's postpaid plan....so it looks like I resoundingly won that round, so once again - you should probably get off your high horse.

Yeah okay, there are several problems with this statement.

First off, it's not true. T-mobile is going to have LTE shortly, "2013", which could mean in a few months or it could mean at the end of the year, but considering a 2 year contract time, you WILL be able to use an iPhone5 on t-mobile LTE before those 2 years are up.

They don't have LTE now, and even if they have it next year, their footprint will likely be very small. I had their first 3G phone when they rolled out 3G - trust me, it wasn't a fast process. It takes years to properly roll out a next generation network. And even still - lets say your area gets it a year from now. You just spent the last year on 3G - which puts you at a disadvantage vs buying the phone on contract with AT&T.

Plus, there is no telling that the iPhone 5 you buy will even work on T-Mobile's LTE bands, if/when they roll it out anyway, so you might be LTE-less even when it reaches your area.

Second, the correct comparison would be comparing T-Mobile prepaid to T-Mobile postpaid. Both have the exact same support for LTE.

No, it would not, because it is impossible to buy a subsidized iPhone on a T-Mobile postpaid plan.

Third, you are moving the goalposts. Instead of comparing prepaid and postpaid, you have decided to change the argument into AT&T vs T-Mobile. I don't deny that different service providers might offer different service, I never claimed otherwise. Good job at pointing out the obvious.

[/quote]

No, I am not moving the goalposts, like I said, you cannot purchase a postpaid iPhone 5 subsidized on T-Mobile. Therefore, the only thing you can do is compare it to the places where you CAN purchase the iPhone subsidized, which is Verizon and AT&T. I've already shown in very clear detail why buying a prepaid iPhone would be a poor decision on Verizon (if they even let you activate it on prepaid), and try as you might, there simply is no direct comparison on T-Mobile because it is not an option.

I'm going to quote myself again - and it will be my final post to you in this thread. Quick recap - you're wrong to attack the media, you are bafflingly smug for someone that's wrong, you are clearly ignorant of the concepts of "choice","personal preference","situations different than your own", and you would do best to slink quietly out of the thread.

What it comes down to is both ways have their advantages, and luckily the customer has their choice of which option they prefer. So you should probably settle down, stop whining about the media mischaracterizing the situation (which they aren't), and just enjoy your prepaid service.

Bye bye, sport. Enjoy your prepaid iPhone. I will enjoy my postpaid Lumia.

 

[kubani1]

I don't know if I wasn't clear enough or what, but I'll break it down to make it more clear. It *must* reference T-Mobile, because the price of contracts and prepaid deals very from service to service.

1- You can either pay $650 or $199 for an iphone5, depending on if you want it with contract or prepaid.

2- If you buy it on contract, you are paying $80+ per month to verizon, sprint, or AT&T.

3- If you buy it outright, and use it on T-Mobile, you can pay $30/month.

$50 less per month times 24 months= $1200 saved. Extra $450 upfront, save $1200 over the contract period, which choice is cheaper?

The article in question was specifically referring to t-mobile and the "steep" $650 cost for a phone if you wanted to use it with t-mobile's prepaid plans.

Do you agree that it's deceptive to imply that the phone costs so much more with t-mobile, when the actual total 2-year cost is significantly less?

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.

 

[antef]

You will note that it explicitly says "3G NetworK" and does not mention LTE - so no, they do not offer LTE prepaid smartphone plans, it would seem. And even if that $80 plan were, in fact, LTE, I already showed you how buying a phone full price and utilizing that plan would actually put you at a disadvantage both short and long term vs Verizon's postpaid plan....so it looks like I resoundingly won that round, so once again - you should probably get off your high horse.

Two problems with this. 1) Expensive iPhone (not sure what off-contract price you used, I'm assuming $600+), and 2) $80/month for crappy Verizon 3G prepaid, I have no idea why anyone would do this.

The $45 Straight Talk service is a lot cheaper and gives you HSPA 3G which is much better. A realistic Verizon price is $90/month (and I'll be generous and exclude the taxes and fees, and this is only for 1 GB of data, not even 2 GB). That means even WITH a $650 iPhone, the savings are still $630 over 2 years, pretty substantial. Or if you bought the Nexus for $350, the savings balloon to $930. This is without even using the very limited T-Mobile plan that was quoted before.

So how is that not a better deal unless you need to stream a lot or need LTE? Good HSPA service can get you 3-5 Mbps which is plenty for anything you need to do.

 

[kubani1]

That is insane compared to the prices here.

2 year contract would only be a total of ~$600. What do you pay upfront when you sign up? I can't see how a cellular provider could give you a $650 phone and only charge you $600 over the next two years and remain in business. Assuming the charge you something upfront, it still seems like they are basically giving you service for nothing.

Thats a pay as you go deal, not contract, you commented on the "prepaid" deals in the uk, not the contract deals.

 

[zerocool84]

I don't know if I wasn't clear enough or what, but I'll break it down to make it more clear. It *must* reference T-Mobile, because the price of contracts and prepaid deals vary from service to service.

1- You can either pay $650 or $199 for an iphone5, depending on if you want it with contract or prepaid.

2- If you buy it on contract, you are paying $80+ per month to verizon, sprint, or AT&T.

3- If you buy it outright, and use it on T-Mobile, you can pay $30/month.

$50 less per month times 24 months= $1200 saved. Extra $450 upfront, save $1200 over the contract period, which choice is cheaper?

The article in question was specifically referring to t-mobile and the "steep" $650 cost for a phone if you wanted to use it with t-mobile's prepaid plans.

Do you agree that it's deceptive to imply that the phone costs so much more with t-mobile, when the actual total 2-year cost is significantly less?

And get 2G speeds except in select markets.

 

[Strk]

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 IP5 on Tmobile is kind of a crappy deal until they move 100% to HSPA+ on the 1900mhz band.

 

[Chiropteran]

They don't have LTE now, and even if they have it next year, their footprint will likely be very small. I had their first 3G phone when they rolled out 3G - trust me, it wasn't a fast process. It takes years to properly roll out a next generation network. And even still - lets say your area gets it a year from now. You just spent the last year on 3G - which puts you at a disadvantage vs buying the phone on contract with AT&T.

And this has nothing to do with anything I wrote at the start of the thread, and also doesn't prove your point. You claimed that prepaid and postpaid gave you a different level of service from the same provider. I called BS, and you still haven't shown anything to prove your point. All you continue to do is point out how Verizon, AT&T, and T-Mobile have different features and technologies- which I was never debating.

I was debating only one thing- price. And I've shown over and over how a full-price phone + prepaid fees for 2 years is less than a subsidized phone and full contract pricing. Keep trying to move the goalposts, not going to work.

Thats a pay as you go deal, not contract, you commented on the "prepaid" deals in the uk, not the contract deals.

What do you pay?

The IP5 on Tmobile is kind of a crappy deal until they move 100% to HSPA+ on the 1900mhz band.

And if the article said that the data rates would suck, I wouldn't be commenting on it.

It didn't. It said the "price is steep", which is very inaccurate.

 

[Deeko]

And this has nothing to do with anything I wrote at the start of the thread, and also doesn't prove your point. You claimed that prepaid and postpaid gave you a different level of service from the same provider. I called BS, and you still haven't shown anything to prove your point. All you continue to do is point out how Verizon, AT&T, and T-Mobile have different features and technologies- which I was never debating.

I was debating only one thing- price. And I've shown over and over how a full-price phone + prepaid fees for 2 years is less than a subsidized phone and full contract pricing. Keep trying to move the goalposts, not going to work.

I know I said I was done with you, but I will not allow you to be dishonest and attempt to twist what I said to mean something else without calling you out. Find where I said the bolded. You will not, because that's not what I said. What I said was this:

Most people don't change carriers when they change phones. And even if they do, there are differences between different carriers and plans, especially prepaid. It isn't a 1:1 change.

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.

Finally, while you have shown scenarios that agree with your side for the underlined, I have also shown scenarios where, on price alone, postpaid is a better deal than prepaid, which is why I've said several times that there is no blanket "right or wrong, this is definitely cheaper" way to go, its all dependent on the individual, making your argument moot to begin with.

There is clearly no point in debating with you - you are dishonest and are not interested in an intelligent debate, all you want to do is stamp your feet and kick and scream because the dastardly media disagrees with your point of view. The point of this post was not even to debate you further - it was more of a warning to other posters to not waste their time with you. Ta ta.

 

[Capt Caveman]

You guys do realize you're being trolled, right?

 

[Chiropteran]

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.

Then you pointed out the press release that only mentions 3G, as if that is proof. It's not proof. Verizon doesn't *sell* any LTE enabled phones for use on prepaid plans, that is why they do not advertise LTE on the prepaid phone plans.

Finally, while you have shown scenarios that agree with your side for the underlined, I have also shown scenarios where, on price alone, postpaid is a better deal than prepaid, which is why I've said several times that there is no blanket "right or wrong, this is definitely cheaper" way to go, its all dependent on the individual, making your argument moot to begin with.

More lies. Please point out a postpaid scenario cheaper than buying ANY phone for full price and paying $30 monthly on T-Mobile.

Instead, you create your own example, completely different from the one described in my original post, and use Verizon's pricing (supposedly, you never actually posted a link supporting your numbers, you just made them up for all I know) and still show a savings.

If you are going to ignore my scenario and create your own, make sure you actually select a valid example. Verizon doesn't have the iPhone5 as a prepaid plan phone choice. In fact, Verzon's incredibly terrible prepaid option only has ONE smartphone choice- Samsung Illusion for $149.99.

But even taking your ridiculous example, and assuming you are being honest when you claim postpaid is only $10 more a month, postpaid is still more expensive.

$149 for the phone up front is still cheaper than an extra $240 over 24 months. Nice try though.

 

[ponyo]

No LTE with phones on prepaid and most prepaid have zero roaming so you're stuck with that carrier only coverage. Both which I'm fine with. My experience with Straight Talk AT&T has been great, and I'm going to miss the savings when I switch to AT&T contract later this month. If Straight Talk offered the nanosim to use with the iPhone5, I probably would've stayed and bought the phone direct from Apple at full price for my wife to use. But Straight Talk doesn't offer nanosim and who knows when they will offer it and Apple doesn't currently offer iPhone5 for off contract purchase.

 

[dagamer34]

The real shame with T-Mobile is that their network isn't compatible with most of the world's 3G phones. Man, if I could get the Nokia Lumia 920 on T-Mobile and only pay $30/month, I would switch IMMEDIATELY. However, I am not willing to compromise on the WVGA screen on the Lumia 820 or take the current 920 and use it on EDGE on T-Mobile. Pass. =/

 

[stlc8tr]

You guys do realize you're being trolled, right?

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.

 

[soccerballtux]

The news and media should inform readers, not put out misleading information.

Ha! What a silly idea!

 

[Chiropteran]

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.

Nope. I'm actually amazed this has been such a debate. It's simple math, people. $30/month times 24 months is so much lower than any contract price. I am absolutely floored that people are trying to say it's not.

If you think t-mobile sucks in some other way, that is fine, has nothing to do with the point I was making.

My simple point is: When the media says the phone price is "steep", yet ignores the fact that during a contract the contract buyers are paying nearly TWICE AS MUCH, it is a bit misleading. There shouldn't even be a debate, it's simple math to see that T-Mobile's deal is far cheaper.

I was using Verizon 2 months ago, paying $80+ tax and fees for basically exact same service as I have now for $30/month.. Now that I have realized just how bad I was ripped off I am just trying to get the word out.