|
Post by jdrizzo89 on Dec 10, 2012 10:01:42 GMT -8
With the news that T mobile will start to offer no subsidized iPhones, my fear is this will, in the coming years, be a serious problem.
Originally it was easy to set up the data deal with AT&T. Of course they would pay the subsidy. There was no real competition in terms of smart phone data consumption. Blackberry was basically a corporate emailing PDA. No where close to the consumption of an iPhone. Fast forward 6 years. Blackberry is dead and android has risen. These are more similar to the consumption of iPhones. In fact I can't even tell the difference at quick glances. Apps and content is growing for android. I fear the days of apple destroying in data consumption will be over Android generally has cheaper phones without subsidy. Will carriers be willing to keep this trend going? Internationally this may be a current problem for the china mobile deal. They don't want to pay and apple knows a majority of Chinese middle and lower class won't pick up a $700 phone. Any thoughts on this future problem?
|
|
|
Post by vikesfaniv on Dec 10, 2012 10:12:12 GMT -8
Perhaps, but my initial reaction is that Apple knew how T-Mobile was going to sell the phone when they agreed to the contract... so whatever is going on behind the scenes Apple seems to be ok with it.
|
|
|
Post by Tetrachloride on Dec 10, 2012 10:17:36 GMT -8
Anybody want to put up some kickstarter numbers (WAG basically) on current and future revenue to Apple ?
Does T-Mobile have a chance to become an influence ?
|
|
|
Post by hellojapan on Dec 10, 2012 11:51:24 GMT -8
Isn't T-Mobile's whole pitch that the consumer will actually save money by buying an unsubsidized phone? That in the long run, you end up paying more than the value of a subsidy over the life of a 2-year contract?
If that is the case, then doesn't Verizon and AT&T actually make money in the long term off iPhone subsidies?
I'm sure I'm missing something basic so thanks in advance for explaining it to me. I just don't understand why, if consumers pay back more than the value of the subsidy, that this would be a practice that carriers would want to end.
|
|
|
Post by jdrizzo89 on Dec 10, 2012 12:07:13 GMT -8
Perhaps that is the t mobile strategy but the average uneducated consumer will just see price point. 700 versus galaxy for 200.
If carriers receive same value or close to same value from a android mostly or totally unsubsidized phone why would they continue this arrangement??
|
|
|
Post by mbeauch on Dec 10, 2012 12:25:07 GMT -8
Anybody want to put up some kickstarter numbers (WAG basically) on current and future revenue to Apple ? Does T-Mobile have a chance to become an influence ? Quick answer, no. Now here is the lone nugget. T-Mobile has better plans so people who are fiscally smart will do the math and realize that it will be a better deal. TM will require say $100 down and finance the remaining 550 which adds $23/month. With their $50/mo plan you come out way ahead compared to the other carriers. After your phone is paid for ou have your $50/mo plan, sweet deal for T,T&D. I take it many of you have forgotten that Apple launched the iphone as an unsubsidized phone. (I still have mine) I remember getting a credit to be used at the Apple store. The sales were good, but not earth shattering. To SJ's credit, he recognized the error of is ways and got together with AT&T and came up with the subsidized plan. It (iphone) really saved T from VZ. I hate them both. Well, the moral of this story is that people in general are not fiscally smart , so no, the impact will be small. I still think TM can add 5-6 mil/yr. Not bad, a $4bil addition to rev from 1 med size carrier.
|
|
|
Post by mbeauch on Dec 10, 2012 12:29:03 GMT -8
Perhaps that is the t mobile strategy but the average uneducated consumer will just see price point. 700 versus galaxy for 200. If carriers receive same value or close to same value from a android mostly or totally unsubsidized phone why would they continue this arrangement?? The Galaxy is not $200. It is subsidized also. I think full retail on the SIII is right there with the iphone.
|
|
|
Post by Big Al on Dec 10, 2012 13:18:03 GMT -8
Perhaps that is the t mobile strategy but the average uneducated consumer will just see price point. 700 versus galaxy for 200. If carriers receive same value or close to same value from a android mostly or totally unsubsidized phone why would they continue this arrangement?? The Galaxy is not $200. It is subsidized also. I think full retail on the SIII is right there with the iphone. Yup. In Germany there is a €200 difference between the S3 and the iPhone 5 in retail.
|
|
|
Post by mbeauch on Dec 10, 2012 13:34:47 GMT -8
Al, what is the Difference minus the VAT?
|
|