Phone Scoop

printed August 4, 2015
See this page online at:
http://www.phonescoop.com/articles/discuss.php?fm=m&ff=5394&fh=2281321

Home  ›  News  ›

Verizon Removes 10 Phones from $350 ETF List

Article Comments  

all discussions

$350 ETA? My Vote: Keep them!

SellFone

Jan 19, 2010, 8:46 PM
Representing Verizon Wireless's #1 Premium Retailer in the midwest I agree that in many cases the $350 ETA fee is justified. Retailers and other privately owned dealers like ourselves are taking large hits as equipment costs have increased from $100-$250 2-3 years ago to $250-$600 on higher end handsets.

Remaining competitive Verizon still offers these handsets and record low prices and many times Buy One Get One Free promotions. Who eats the profits? Answer: The dealers that still pay regular price for the equipment.

Many customers realized quickly that you could do a BOGO promotion, pay the ETAs, sell the phones at retail and make a decent profit. This is unethical and bad business.

Customers need to know the truth about raised ET...
(continues)
...
Desolationblade

Jan 19, 2010, 11:54 PM
Account verizon fanboy let me put this straight. I sell the following at my retailer, At@t, Verizon, Tmo, and Sprint. The Black berry curve that is free right now, no rebate no buy one get one free, is 619.99 noncontract. I got news for you, Our cost is $322.48.

That is what my retailer pays for that phone. For an upgrade alone, we get a 345 dollar ring credit. So we are profitable on it. Also my verizon rep told me on an 89.99 450 min data/text plan, it takes 8 months to recover what the costs. Now heres the thing that is if it was at MY COST. At verizon whom probably get the phones cheaper...

But lets say its the same price. They charge 100 dollars, with 100 rebate and another 50-100 dollars with a 50-100 rebate, DEBIT CARD,...
(continues)
...
Desolationblade

Jan 19, 2010, 11:55 PM
I need to proof read but its late, Okay Verizon fanboy is what i ment, and its at&t...
...
Menno

Jan 20, 2010, 1:41 AM
I'm assuming that is the 8330 blackberry, right? You are charging 612. the retailer this guy would be working for would charge 380 (assuming your costs are the same) Your retailer marks up the phones a lot more than most do (corp is only like 50 or so). Not even the DROID retails as much for the retailer this guy works for (assuming he is the one I am thinking of)... CCPP sellfone?

Just because your company decides to double the price on the markup doesn't mean others do.

BUT! look at your own figures. the device COSTS 322. you are giving it to the consumer for 0, that is a LOSS of $322. see that? only $27 LESS than the new ETF. And I'm betting that's one of your cheaper (cost) smartphones, correct? While your markup is ins...
(continues)
...
SellFone

Jan 20, 2010, 9:15 AM
This post was about how these changes effect and cost retailers, not Verizon Wireless themselves.

1) Verizon Wireless receives any ETA fees, not the store you purchased from.

2) Phones sold at retail costs have very little markup.

3) Many people think that we (retailers) get this equipment cheap, when in all reality, we pay nearly retail. Product Loss is the business we fight every day.
...
Desolationblade

Jan 20, 2010, 11:15 AM
no contract price is way above retail price usually 50-100% more infact. The point was the no contract price of the bb curve 8330 is 619.99 for verizon. It costs my retailer 322 for the phone. Verizon's store with the bogo loses about 200 on the contract handset price. But that is easily made up in 4-6 months. So after 6 months verizon makes up the cost of the handset. Term fee is useless

droid is 179.99 I believe after rebate. So nearly 300 dollars and obly 2 in 5 get their rebate back. So nearly 300 dollars for a handset that costs retail about 460. So they are out 160-260 depending if rebate is sent in. So on a droid can take as little as 3 months as much as 8 months for the profits to make back the handset cost. That's based on profit...
(continues)
...
Menno

Jan 20, 2010, 1:21 PM
The no contract price on the 8330 is 429.00 online.

The term fee is there for equipment AND because you signed the contract. When you sign up for a 2 year contract, verizon expects revenue for those 2 years and they adjust their budgeting accordingly. If people could just cancel after 8 months, a lot of people would (just to get new phones with verizon ironically).

If you take out a loan, if they applied all your monthly payments to your balance, you'd pay it off a lot faster than the stated term, correct? Do you think that this means people should be able to get out of loan repayments once they pay off their balance, even if they have 10+years of interest? How likely do you think loans would be then?

What I'm getting at is th...
(continues)
...
Desolationblade

Jan 20, 2010, 3:26 PM
I guess the price needs updated where I work. The problem is verizon claims that they lose money if someone cancels on month 23, which is false. They do not want people canceling is the problem, seeing about 700,000 people lost this year alone.

Verizon used to be dominant especially in my area. Now there are other providers around with good deals, good coverage and good phones as well. Verizon's increase is to make customers stay, that is it. If u have a problem u will be less likely to cancel, but once they call you saying new bogo black berry, u sign up again and ur stuck.

That is the sole and only reason to raise the fee. Honestly is BOGO blackberry is a problem, GET RID OF THE BOGO. If you cannot sell phones w/o bogo ur doin...
(continues)
...
Menno

Jan 20, 2010, 3:47 PM
A lot of customers will refuse to buy phones until they go bogo, not matter how cheap you make the devices.
...
Desolationblade

Jan 20, 2010, 4:03 PM
Then how come I sell a crapton of nonbogo phones where I work? Maybe its just my area but people buy what is good, not what is cheap. Sprint to my knowledge is not doing bogo(Although our BB curve 8330 are 20 new 50 upgrade) no rebate, sprint is our biggest sell by far?

So if the "lesser" network charges for phones and sells them, why can't the "greater" network do the same, since people proclaim verizon is god?
...
Menno

Jan 20, 2010, 4:09 PM
it is your area then, because around here people only buy what is free (or closest to it). Verizon customers expect free phones, they expect bogos. Sprint customers don't, and if sprint is your biggest seller is sprint, your region is atypical for the country given that they lose nearly a million (or more) customers a quarter.
...
Desolationblade

Jan 20, 2010, 4:22 PM
Well, I hate to say it but ur counting the loss not the gain. Verizon lost nearly 3 million customers last year and gained about 1.8, for a netloss of 1.2 million. Sprint lost about 1.6 million total and gained 3.2 million, get ur facts str8 and lets see some proof...
...
Menno

Jan 20, 2010, 4:24 PM
read any quarterly statements. verizon net gains 1million+ a quarter. Sprint net LOST almost as much per quarter in post paid customers
...
Desolationblade

Jan 20, 2010, 4:25 PM
Check the 2009 statements not the 2005 buddy...
...
Menno

Jan 20, 2010, 4:34 PM
I just posted the 2009 statements:

http://www.phonescoop.com/news/discuss.php?fm=m&ff=5 ... »

Net ADD of 3.6 million customers. Q4 results are not posted, so they cannot be listed yet.

Your turn.
...
Menno

Jan 20, 2010, 4:33 PM
Q1 2009:
http://news.softpedia.com/news/Verizon-Sees-Good-Q1- ... »
(1.3 million net adds)

Q2 2009:
http://www.fiercewireless.com/story/verizon-adds-1-1 ... »
(1.1 Million net adds)

Q3 2009
http://www.fiercewireless.com/story/verizon-trails-t ... »
(1.2 Million net adds)

Q4 isn't in yet.

Oh, and these numbers do not count alltel since as per FCC, they cannot count as "added" customers.

So so far, they've added 3.6 Million net customers. Yes, that's slower than last year, but it's still a gain.

Now you post for Sprint. Remember,we are talking Post Paid customers, not boost mobile/Virgin mobile.
...
Desolationblade

Jan 20, 2010, 4:38 PM
Oncew i get home sure, posting from my BB, and those sits dont look that legit, post an offical government sensus(spelling) of it plz and ill do the same.
...
Desolationblade

Jan 20, 2010, 4:47 PM
I was checking around offical sprint sites, according to the info I read, although it is not offical, sprint will not post its results til feb 10 2010, I cannot link this due to the Black berry but meh. Looks like their growth will be less then what those sites you linked proclaimed about Verizon, but like I said it doesnt look legit. Currently Sprint+nextel outgrowthed verizon+alltel, but Verizon beat out Sprint by about 1.3 million ASSUMING that information you linked it correct

PS: Who uses nextel service other then contracts and government?
...
Menno

Jan 20, 2010, 6:55 PM
a lot of businesses use Nextel. And Sprint LOST almost a million customers a quarter (q1-q3) so unless they gained 3+million q4, I highly doubt they gained ANY customers.
...
Menno

Jan 20, 2010, 4:59 PM
there are not "official government census" those are press releases. The government doesn't take a census of wireless subscribers, companies report it.

Fierce wireless is like phonescoop. It's all phone news. If you post sprint results from a non-sprint site, I'm sure you'll find the same results for Verizon I posted here.


The first one wasn't from Fierce,so here is the official press release for Q1
http://investor.verizon.com/news/view.aspx?NewsID=983 »



Just to give you an idea... this is Sprint's numbers from that site:
http://www.fiercemobilecontent.com/story/sprint-loss ... »

The lost 1.25 million post paid customers, but they gained 764,000 Boost Mobile customers, in addition to ...
(continues)
...
Desolationblade

Jan 22, 2010, 12:15 AM
Something interesting I learned today. Sprint did in the postpaid department come out ahead(not by much) like 45,000 customers. Verizon Lost nearly 9 million customers and gained 13 million or so in 2009. Its due to 2 things. Customer service and billing fraud caused alot of customers to leave.

However their great advertising and goodwill(name) generated much more then they loss. I gotta give them credit on this one. They are amazing at advertising and spreading the word. But they have had more class-action lawsuits and fraud investigations then any company to date.

This is not so much the service its the people that work for them. It is however in a centralized area(local city) ran by the same DM that has had most of the fra...
(continues)
...
Menno

Jan 22, 2010, 12:26 AM
Verizon landline is NOT the same company as verizon wireless.
...
ShakeLOVE

Jan 20, 2010, 2:06 PM
Posted by a employee of the most dishonest Agent I've ever seen Cellular Connection. Were we sell used and refurbs as new. I hate you Moorhead people
...
Menno

Jan 20, 2010, 3:56 PM
sorry, but the phones are shipped direct from warehoused owned by other companies (or from verizon) so if the phones are used or refurbished, they are being sold to the company as such.
...
Menno

Jan 20, 2010, 4:11 PM
If it is as your say, you should have quite a bit of proof (at least articles of said places being shut down) because not only is selling used phones as new against the law, but it is against verizon policy and will lead to the stores shutting down. and if it was a corporate policy, I'm sure that it would make bigger news because when I was out in indiana, Cellular COnnection was all I saw.
...
Kilya

Jan 20, 2010, 8:16 PM
I agree and don't agree with you on this. Keep in mind I am in the wireless industry. However, contracts were really designed because people in the United States do want something for free. This is almost soloy why we have contracts. The UK pay full price for their phones and their services are prepaid. Now breaking terms of a contract and paying an ETF is not made because people can't honor their word. Don't get me wrong I am sure that some people leave for very stupid reasons but understand that this is a 2 way street. If the service isn't providing like it says (ex: Company says they have service where they don't, and this happens all the time) then it is the Service side that is in the wrong and in some will allow you to break the contra...
(continues)
...
SellFone

Jan 21, 2010, 9:18 AM
I agree with you on the fact that the wireless industry in the United States shot themselves in the foot when they are started offering $1 or Penny phones in exchange for a contract. (damn Radio Shack!) I would love it if we could sell phones at our cost (or even a small markup) and then get a cut for signing people up.

But lets be realistic: How many people would be on here complaining about spending $500+ on these high end devices because of no discounting. More people would simply go without or wouldn't want to upgrade their handsets due to the high cost. The customer experience and satisfaction wouldn't be as high.

All in all, the way it works now benefits the wireless phone manufacturers by being able to sell high end phones to th...
(continues)
...
stevejaye

Jan 23, 2010, 4:45 PM
I say keep them and if you don't like them, switch carriers or pay full price for the handset!

I don't understand why it is so hard for most people to figure it out, it common sense
...

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