Phone Scoop

printed September 4, 2015
See this page online at:
http://www.phonescoop.com/articles/discuss.php?fm=m&ff=4481&fh=2091206

Home  ›  News  ›

Senators Target Carrier Exclusivity

Article Comments  

all discussions

So the feds want to tell manufacturers who they have to sell to?

Globhead

Jun 15, 2009, 6:16 PM
It seems like there are bigger problems out there.

How about the fact that the carriers are all dumping subsidized phones on the market? That is literally stopping dozens of phone models from being offered in the US every year, but they don't have a problem with that. Heck, we even have existing laws against it, but they won't do anything.

Maybe some idiot senator just wants an iPhone. Somebody give him a G1 and tell him to get back to work.
...
CellStudent

Jun 15, 2009, 8:05 PM
...stop the Carriers from INTERFERING with the manufacturers right to sell to EVERYONE.

Take this quick survey for me please:

Did you buy your television from your local TV station?
Did you buy your water heater from the gas company?
Did you buy your microwave from the power company?
Did you buy your kitchen sink from the water company?
Did you buy your laptop from the cable/DSL provider in your area?
Did you buy your car from the Department of Transportation?

Why the hell is cellular somehow supposed to operate on completely different economic principles then EVERY OTHER INDUSTRY IN NORTH AMERICA?

Probably the best thing that could happen for wireless in this country is if carriers got 100% out of the hardware business enti...
(continues)
...
wecivus

Jun 15, 2009, 8:20 PM
Do you want to pay full retail price for your phone every time you have to buy one?, just like you would a microwave or a water heater? Most people had rather get a free one regardless if its tied to a certain carrier or not(or at least a big discount). I think the government needs to stop trying to take control of everything. This is beginning to get ridiculous.
...
Versed

Jun 15, 2009, 11:07 PM
wecivus said:
Do you want to pay full retail price for your phone every time you have to buy one?, just like you would a microwave or a water heater? Most people had rather get a free one regardless if its tied to a certain carrier or not(or at least a big discount). I think the government needs to stop trying to take control of everything. This is beginning to get ridiculous.


What the carriers say the msrp is and what it is, are two different things. I'm sure prices would be lower then what the carriers would be charging if one didn't have a subsidy. The again, choice is good. Sometime I don't mind paying outright, other times do to phone costs, its actually cheaper to get a subsidy and cancel if so...
(continues)
...
Menno

Jun 16, 2009, 9:14 AM
you're right, if all the phones only came at full retail the MSRP would be lower. This is partially because there would be more "unlocked" phones out there (making phones for 2-3 carriers is always cheaper than making phones for 1) and also because without a subsidy of contracts, they will have to take a bigger hit on the phones to try and entice customers.

But I can tell you from a stores perspective, what we have to pay the carrier to purchase the phones isn't a whole lot cheaper than the price sticker you see on the phones. (an average of 40-60 dollars). Other stores (best buy, walmart) mark them up a lot more, but generally in stores, any markup is done at either the carrier or the manufacturer level. Once subsidized costs are gon...
(continues)
...
snakpakdeuce

Jun 16, 2009, 1:13 PM
at least for tmob, they dont subsidize the phones imo. Im a big fan of nokias, and you can get a good basic phone for 200.00 same kind ud pay t mob for. 180.00 true be eh.
...
Versed

Jun 16, 2009, 10:10 PM
snakpakdeuce said:
at least for tmob, they dont subsidize the phones imo. Im a big fan of nokias, and you can get a good basic phone for 200.00 same kind ud pay t mob for. 180.00 true be eh.


What, can you rephrase that in english?
...
akito

Jun 17, 2009, 8:36 PM
Menno said:
you're right, if all the phones only came at full retail the MSRP would be lower. This is partially because there would be more "unlocked" phones out there (making phones for 2-3 carriers is always cheaper than making phones for 1)


So ATT and Tmobile are going to see less new phones then verizon and sprint becuase GSM is not used as much as CDMA. What about the regional carriers?
...
Menno

Jun 17, 2009, 8:45 PM
gsm is used FAR MORE than cdma internationally, so att and tmobile should be fine.

Unlocked phones would be available to all regional carriers (as long as they were using CDMA or GSM technology)

I really don't see unlocked phones becoming big until 4g, when all the major carriers (sans sprint) are using LTE
...
CellStudent

Jun 15, 2009, 11:20 PM
While I would, yes, personally welcome a 30% drop in monthly rates due to a loss of subsidy, the point of this thread is to fight exclusivity which is an entirely separate matter.
Both should be extinguished. Hopefully the Cricket, Metro and Boost growth can convince the big boys to develop a line of unsubsidized” rate plans with a national scope.

I think part of what would happen also is you will start seeing REALLY well built hardware again. When a phone is bought on a two year plan expectation the engineers only need to build a device with a 30 month life expectancy. In most design applications a 25% increase in cost of parts and construction will return way more then 25% improvement in working life.
The problem really is that...
(continues)
...
Cell Dude

Jun 16, 2009, 8:09 AM
CellStudent said:
While I would, yes, personally welcome a 30% drop in monthly rates due to a loss of subsidy, the point of this thread is to fight exclusivity which is an entirely separate matter.
Both should be extinguished. Hopefully the Cricket, Metro and Boost growth can convince the big boys to develop a line of unsubsidized” rate plans with a national scope.

I think part of what would happen also is you will start seeing REALLY well built hardware again. When a phone is bought on a two year plan expectation the engineers only need to build a device with a 30 month life expectancy. In most design applications a 25% increase in cost of parts and construction will return way more then 25% improvement in wor
...
(continues)
...
SPCSVZWJeff

Jun 17, 2009, 8:57 PM
The iphone is the worst argument for this.
Apple controls even which retail stores get to sell their phones regardless of carrier so your precious iPhone is controlled by Apple, not the carriers.

Carrier exclusivity may not be popular but given the fact that the government wants to end up controlling businesses then maybe it is better to put up with it and slow down this mad dash to eliminate the freedom to do business as you please.

The government needs to just keep their hands off. Wireless is not a regulated industry like landlines or power so the less control the better.

Leave it alone. Allow carriers to compete in this way.

Those of you who are saying that the government should force this issue for the sake of competitio...
(continues)
...
captainplooky

Jun 16, 2009, 7:24 AM
wecivus said:
I think the government needs to stop trying to take control of everything. This is beginning to get ridiculous.


Laughing

Out of curiosity... are you a teabagger?
...
wecivus

Jun 16, 2009, 10:58 AM
what are you talking about???
...
crood

Jun 16, 2009, 9:05 AM
Do you get a new TV, water heater, microwave, sink, laptop, or car every 2 years?
...
Overmann

Jun 16, 2009, 9:11 AM
Do you NEED to get a new TV, water heater, microwave, sink, laptop, or car every 2 years?
...
captainplooky

Jun 16, 2009, 11:01 AM
Laughing

Yeah that showed him! Showed him you missed the entire point of his comments, but showed him nonetheless and for that you should be... proud?
...
WZ_agent

Jun 16, 2009, 12:42 PM
his point was subsidized phones on plans every 2 years work differently then the previously mentioned products. i got his point, why didnt you?
...
murmermer

Jun 16, 2009, 1:04 PM
there is a reason unlocked phones sell so horribly here in the states... people want CHEAP products! the carriers can offer free phones to the public with a 2 year contract.

everyone wins.

Where in the constitution does it say the government has the right to tell Verizon which blackberry to sell?
...
Versed

Jun 16, 2009, 10:14 PM
murmermer said:
there is a reason unlocked phones sell so horribly here in the states... people want CHEAP products! the carriers can offer free phones to the public with a 2 year contract.

everyone wins.

Where in the constitution does it say the government has the right to tell Verizon which blackberry to sell?

Where does it say it doesn't?
...
Globhead

Jun 16, 2009, 6:19 PM
1. The only way the carriers are "interfering" with the manufacturers rights is with forced subsidies, which undercuts legitimate pricing of other phones. Forcing the manufacturers to sell to all carriers, who will still sell phones the same way, isn't going to fix that. Stopping the bundling/dumping behavior, which is illegal for other industries, WOULD fix that.

2. Manufacturers have the right to enter exclusive deals. Stopping that is INFRINGING on their rights, not protecting them.
...
CellStudent

Jun 16, 2009, 11:50 PM
Corporations do NOT have the right to exclusivity deals that act "in restraint of trade" which is what the casual onlooker would call a cartel.
That is what this request is trying to do: investigate the possibility of collusion between carriers and device makers and determine whether such arrangements actually infringe on free market principles.

I think Apple and ATT have at least one thing right in the way they are marketing right now. I can't remember the last ATT commercial I saw that said iPhone somewhere in it. I also can't recall the last iPhone commercial I saw that mentioned ATT.
That's the way things ought to work in this environment. Let the carriers sell and advertise the service, let LG and RIM advertise their handhelds an...
(continues)
...
texaswireless

Jun 18, 2009, 12:07 AM
Carriers, not individuals, are the manufacturers biggest customers. They say they want to buy a phone with a particular feature set and the manufacturer says yes or no.

No force, unless you count when the government involved.

There is no "restraint of trade" here. Your argument would be somewhat valid 2 or 3 years ago when you would be hard pressed to buy an unlocked handset. They are everywhere now. It is even against the law to punish an individual for unlocking a handset they purchase.

Please, it is 2009.
...
texaswireless

Jun 18, 2009, 12:01 AM
Another one clueless as how this all works.

Do you REALLY think Apple can only sell the iPhone because AT&T ALLOWS them to sell it through them? I guess you do by this post.

The cellphone carriers are not 100% to blame for this offering. The cell phone manufacturers are not doing this with a gun pointed at their head.
...

This forum is closed.

Please log in to report a message to the moderator.

This forum is closed.


all discussions

Subscribe to Phone Scoop News with RSS Follow @phonescoop on Twitter Phone Scoop on Facebook Subscribe to Phone Scoop on YouTube Follow on Instagram

 

All content Copyright 2001-2015 Phone Factor, LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Content on this site may not be copied or republished without formal permission.
2