Home  ›  News  ›

FCC Task Force Tackles AT&T, Google, Sprint, T-Mobile, Verizon

Article Comments  

all discussions

show all 46 replies

here it comes! no more subsidies

60dollarcarcharger

Jan 26, 2010, 2:09 PM
I can't see why the wireless networks wouldn't strong arm this and say "fine, no more ETF's, no more phone subsidies, that $50 dollar phone will now be 250 bucks."

Then we can really give the consumers something to whine about right?

Is this a case of... be careful what you wish for?
...
Menno

Jan 26, 2010, 2:15 PM
FCC: Der.... Our 2 year old daughters say that things should be free without contracts... but you guys are charging money so YOU GUYS ARE WRONG! oh ... brb, gonna go watch Sponge Bob BECAUSE HE IS SO SMART.


World: WTF?
...
60dollarcarcharger

Jan 26, 2010, 2:17 PM
🤣
...
ac2913

Jan 26, 2010, 2:28 PM
lol maybe tmo saw this coming a while ago...which is why their no contract rates are super low and make ppl pay for phones full price....those germans are geniuses (just ask albert einstein) haha...
...
sugarb85

Jan 26, 2010, 4:08 PM
🤣 You're probably right
...
flagrantmisuse

Jan 26, 2010, 2:39 PM
i know this is beating a dead horse but...companies already offer fones with no subsidy and no contract. are you suggesting consumers buy their phones directly from the manufacturer? *gasp*
...
60dollarcarcharger

Jan 26, 2010, 2:45 PM
that's be nice... cut out the middle man.. save a few bucks...

I for one, like the subsidy model... it works. The problem is that the average customer and maybe even the FCC doesn't understand why its there and what the ramificatons would be of not using it...

Slap that on top of the fact that most people don't disconnect anyway and you get this big brew-ha for nothing
...
Azeron

Jan 26, 2010, 3:00 PM
It is political grand standing. I hope it backfires in this idiots face like Marvin Martian.
...
60dollarcarcharger

Jan 26, 2010, 3:00 PM
me too.... until I have to buy my next phone lol
...
sugarb85

Jan 26, 2010, 4:10 PM
🤣
...
Azeron

Jan 26, 2010, 2:52 PM
It would be a great model. ALL the carriers need to end subsidies in one fell swoop, else wise if only one does it then it would be doomed. The FCC is pushing all the carriers into a corner. This is a great opportunity for them all to cease subsidies without being accused of collusion.
...
Jayshmay

Jan 26, 2010, 3:53 PM
Nice to know I'm not alone on here Azeron.

The wireless industry should be no different than the cable tv industry. You buy you phone or tv of -choice- and take your phone or tv to your service provider of choice.
...
sugarb85

Jan 26, 2010, 4:12 PM
Amen. Although would be kinda hard with the CDMA carriers to do such since CDMA phones can mostly only be flashed only on regional networks.
...
Jayshmay

Jan 26, 2010, 5:21 PM
I don't know. Personally, I've never owned a CDMA phone. ATT is the only carrier I've ever been with, slightly over 8yrs.
...
Azeron

Jan 26, 2010, 7:05 PM
Currently, manufacturers produce the handsets with carrier specific software. In an open/unlocked/whatever model this would not be the case.
...
CS2006

Jan 26, 2010, 9:03 PM
One of the great things about being an American is the freedom to be an individual.
If you force unlocked phones you will also possibly be forced to mandate a network.
Companies enjoy the freedom to innovate and have unique offerings.
The FCC has the mandate to make sure that the airwaves are not misused, not to dictate rates being charged. That would be under the responsibility of the FTC or a PUC.
The FCC mandating anything that is not affecting the use of the airwaves is beyond their scope.
Ending phone subsidies by eliminating ETF's is a clear violation of contract law and could have severe implications in the mortgage and insurance industry as well.
...
Jayshmay

Jan 26, 2010, 10:52 PM
Well then if theres something that the carrier offers, that you WANT on your phone, but isn't shoved down your throat, like it currently is, then perhaps the carrier can set up some web portal where you can download an OS specific app.
...
crood

Jan 26, 2010, 5:08 PM
The problem is you connect any television to any cable system. You can't do that with cell phones. There is CDMA vs. GSM and then there's all of the different frequencies being used. Even if you had an unlocked iPhone, it wouldn't work on Verizon or Sprint and you'd only have EDGE data speeds on Tmobile.
...
Jayshmay

Jan 26, 2010, 3:48 PM
Ebay & Amazon the past 4yrs for me. People don't buy tvs from cable providers, nor should people buy cell phones from wireless providers.
...
crood

Jan 26, 2010, 5:10 PM
Then I guess the FCC shouldn't be making money by auctioning off spectrum and thereby forcing different carriers to use different frequencies.
...
dshearn

Jan 27, 2010, 11:10 AM
Yea.....

The cable company has a cable box...the cable box will spit out the format in a form that ANY current TV can use.
...
Azeron

Jan 26, 2010, 2:43 PM
This is GREAT news. All the carriers can cease subsidizing phones as a direct result of FCC meddling. There is no right to a cheap phone.
...
daxdc

Jan 26, 2010, 2:48 PM
But why force people who can barely afford the price of these phones to pay that much? Az, you are forgetting that the average Phonescoop member DOES NOT represent the average cellular customer
...
Azeron

Jan 26, 2010, 2:58 PM
If one cannot afford to pay the REAL cost of the phone...one should not have a phone. This includes me. I am broke as a joke. My principles have nothing to do with my own self interests. I simply do NOT believe that it is right that the government stick its nose in here, just as I feel that it is wrong for those who make more money to be taxed at a higher rate. I just call it as I see it.
...
bp3dots1

Jan 26, 2010, 3:25 PM
People could also buy prepaid phones if they can't afford a full price contract model.

When I want a new phone I SAVE MY MONEY to get the one I want. 😳 Last year it was $500 for a Blackberry Bold. This year, The new Xperia X10 will be mine!! (I'm kinda scared to see how much that ones gonna be 👀

There are options for everyone out there. Not everyone needs an iPhone/Blackberry/Droid. This entitlement attitude needs to end.
...
Azeron

Jan 26, 2010, 3:32 PM
Exactly! The funny thing is that the carriers like the model the way it is because they get to lock customers in for two years. That is guaranteed revenue. These people are going to force their hands though and I for one love it.
...
bp3dots1

Jan 26, 2010, 3:41 PM
Agreed. I love having the option to up and leave whenever I please. That freedom is more than worth the cost of the phones.
...
crood

Jan 26, 2010, 5:15 PM
For you, but I'd bet if you polled most wireless customers, they prefer the subsidies.
...
bp3dots1

Jan 26, 2010, 6:28 PM
I'm sure the would, which I why I think they should be raising hell against these investigations. The loudest voice gets heard. If they say nothing, then they will have to live with the outcome.
...
Azeron

Jan 26, 2010, 7:48 PM
Sure they do. They also do not value the phones at all. They let the three year old play with the Droid and when he drops it in the milk want Verizon to replace it free of charge because they have been a customer for five years. Yes and during those five years you received five years of service. THAT'S what you pay for. I am sick, sick, sick of these spoiled consumers. I am against subsidies. The carriers are NOT. They want to keep contracts for as long as possible, but the FCC is about to kill the goose which laid the golden egg and it cannot happen a moment too soon in my estimation.
...
donjonson410

Jan 26, 2010, 2:59 PM
Its not desirable for loyal customers, ive been with sprint for 8 years and never plan on leaving. Why should I pay full price for a phone when I am paying the same monthly rate, I deserve a discount every year.
...
Azeron

Jan 26, 2010, 3:12 PM
I disagree. I vehemently disagree actually. Your length of time spent as a customer should have nothing to do with phone pricing. You should pay for a service the carrier provides.
...
donjonson410

Jan 26, 2010, 3:19 PM
My point is, that if I am paying the same monthly rate and Had to pay full price for my phone, I am losing as a consumer. If Monthly rates were adjusted accordingly I wouldn't mind paying full price.
...
Azeron

Jan 26, 2010, 3:26 PM
My point is: You are paying for wireless service. Carriers only discount the phones to entice you to use their service. They should not be selling phones in the first place. You should buy an unlocked handset from the manufacturer of your choice and then take it to the wireless carrier of your choice and activate it with no contract.
...
crood

Jan 26, 2010, 5:23 PM
Who then would be selling the phone? The two cellular technolgies predominant in the U.S. and the various frequencies used by carriers eliminates the economies of scale gained from mass producing devices.

TV's will work with any cable or satellite provider. They're all essentially built the same from a technological perspective. There's only some relatively minor variations in quality.

The number of different models would plummet. Instead of subsidies to the consumer, providers would just shift those to the Best Buys and Radio Shacks, who'd then put phones for those networks "on sale"

Also, with a decent antenna I could receive a TV signal without paying for any service whatsoever. I know that's not true for everyone, but i...
(continues)
...
Jayshmay

Jan 26, 2010, 4:08 PM
What a customer pays for monthly service, and what a customer pays for a phone should have absolutly nothing to do with each other.
...
randy420

Jan 27, 2010, 2:42 AM
So then, do you expect your television company to adjust your monthly rates because you have to pay full price for a new TV, or your internet provider to do the same just because you have to pay full price for a new computer?

I understand the point that you're trying to make, but I think it's a stretch to come to the conclusion that your monthly cell phone bill should change just because of how much you pay for a phone is retarded.
...
Azeron

Jan 27, 2010, 4:41 PM
I agree that it would be unrealistic to expect prices to be lowered simply because consumers are no longer having their phones subsidized by the carriers. I believe it would be likely that rates would be lowered in the long run due to competition, however. With local number portability and the freedom to jump from carrier to carrier one month to the next. Consumers would exercise more power to affect pricing by voting with their feet (and more importantly their wallets).
...
bp3dots1

Jan 26, 2010, 3:28 PM
If that's your feeling, you and others of similar sentiment should be vocally opposing this line of FCC investigation. It's only putting what you want in jeopardy.
...
sugarb85

Jan 26, 2010, 4:35 PM
I totally disagree with you. Cell phones are still considered luxuries and if you don't like the monthly plan costs than get a prepaid phone. Besides I think Sprint offers pretty damn good plans for good price regardless if you get a subsidy or not!
...
Jayshmay

Jan 26, 2010, 4:00 PM
If someone wants an high-end device they pay a high-end price, if they want a low-end device then they pay a low-end price. MetroPCS is a perfect example. They've got crap phones for like $50, and then they have slightly better ones for $200. You want more, pay more, you want less, pay less.

Personally, if a device is well specced, I'm willing to pay for it (even if I have to save for a little bit).
...
Globhead

Jan 26, 2010, 4:48 PM
Sure, everyone needs a phone. But the wholesale cost of a bottom-of-the-barrel unlocked GSM phone is about 30 bucks. That's less than most people pay for one month of service.

Go cry for poor people somewhere else.
...
texaswireless

Jan 26, 2010, 4:52 PM
Can't the consumer choose one or the other?
...
Azeron

Jan 26, 2010, 7:27 PM
It would be nice. It REALLY would, but look where we stand now. Consumers want to sign contracts to receive subsidies and then not abide by the ETFs which THEY agreed to. They whine to the FCC and the FCC being politicians after all and panderers at heart have the audacity to question the carriers. So yeah. I say *Bleep* it! Let's do away with the whole blasted thing.
...
texaswireless

Jan 26, 2010, 9:27 PM
Or we can just do a better job of educating customers on their options.

This is a very small % of people who are complaining. The other complaint comes from the carriers that still require a contract extension for rate plan changes. I think the FCC is too late now because the carriers, for the most part, self regulated with their postpaid and prepaid offerings. The difference is they did what the market demanded rather than what the FCC demanded.

Just like the text messaging "issue" this too will go away. You cannot regulate private industry in this way.
...
evrodude

Jan 27, 2010, 10:31 AM
Here is an idea:

AT&T buys out T-Mobile and Verizon buys out Sprint. LTE and same frequency. No more subsidies. Phones retail from $250 to $600 a piece and consumers make their choices. Monthly rates are anywhere from $50 to $200 depending on number of minutes and other features. Consumers makes their choices. Problem solved.
...
Azeron

Jan 27, 2010, 4:45 PM
No more mergers please. We need more competition in this industry...not less. I believe that a nationwide footprint such as Sprint and T-Mobile have is sufficient. Sure they do not cover every inch of the country, but it is not necessary that they do so. For those unfortunates (such as myself) who live in more secluded areas our options will be less but to those seventy-five percent of Americans living in Metropolitan areas one of the four will be fine.
...

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 Threads Follow @phonescoop on Mastodon Phone Scoop on Facebook Follow on Instagram

 

Playwire

All content Copyright 2001-2024 Phone Factor, LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Content on this site may not be copied or republished without formal permission.