backtop


Print 106 comment(s) - last by KOOLTIME.. on Aug 8 at 10:53 PM

John Legere saves his harshest criticism for AT&T

John Legere is a man who doesn’t mince his words. The T-Mobile CEO has been relatively quiet after apologizing for comments that he made at an “UnCarrier” event back in June. While touting T-Mobile’s services and pricing strategy, Legere referred to AT&T and Verizon Wireless, stating:
 
These high and mighty duopolists that are raping you for every penny you have, if they could do something nice for you they would. The f--kers hate you.
 
Legere is now taking to Twitter to again blast the competition when it comes to pricing, but he has toned down the language, if only just a tad. Legere fired off the following tweets:
 
 
 
He then directed his followers to his latest blog post, which details a new family plan for T-Mobile customers that will go into effect starting July 30. Under the newest T-Mobile Simple Choice plan, a family of four will have access to 10GB of LTE data (2.5GB per line), unlimited domestic texting, unlimited international text in 120+ countries, unlimited calling, and access to T-Mobile’s unRadio music services. In addition, there will be no overage fees if customers blow past their monthly data allotments.

 
T-Mobile's plan for a family of four will cost $100 per month compared to $160 per month for similar plans from AT&T, Verizon Wireless, and Sprint. As expected, Legere was pounding his chest about T-Mobile’s bargain basement pricing:
 
AT&T’s sinking some serious dough into marketing their latest-greatest family pricing, which strikes me as funny. Because their deal is no deal at all, and next to T-Mobile’s Simple Choice Family Plan, AT&T’s “Best-Ever Pricing for Families” is a joke…
 
It doesn’t take a genius, right? That’s $60 in your wallet every month for a family of four —or $1,440 over two years. What would your family or small business do with those savings?
 
It infuriates me that they’re selling this to hardworking families who could use that money for more important things.  And they have the nerve to call it “Best-Ever Pricing.”  I just couldn’t stand by without speaking up and calling them on their BS.
 
So will T-Mobile’s latest move start an all-new pricing war amongst U.S. carriers? We can only hope so as we could all stand to shave a few bucks off our monthly bills.

Sources: @JohnLegere, T-Mobile



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Perhaps saving
By SrogerS4 on 7/28/2014 10:35:55 AM , Rating: 2
The other carriers sell subsidized phones for ~$200 up front ($800 for the family)

T-mobile will give you the phone and then charge you ~$25/month over the next two years.

So you probably will end up paying $40/month more with T-mobile, catching up to the $800 initial after 20 months of the typical 24 month plan.

Selling phone plans is all about perceived costs/savings though, so T-mobile will probably do well with this.




RE: Perhaps saving
By retrospooty on 7/28/2014 10:46:13 AM , Rating: 4
"So you probably will end up paying $40/month more with T-mobile, catching up to the $800 initial after 20 months of the typical 24 month plan."

It depends on the cost of the phone. If you buy a high end ($600)phone from T-mobile, then yes, its going to be $25 a month until paid off. If you get a cheaper phone, it's less, or if you just buy your own phone, it costs nothing.


RE: Perhaps saving
By BRB29 on 7/28/2014 1:17:48 PM , Rating: 5
It's worse than you think. Even if you bring in an unlocked phone, ATT will still charge you the $15. The $160 they came up with is like this.

$100 for 10GB family share data plan
$15 per line if it's 10-50GB share plan

Therefore a family of 4 will be $160. This is a ripoff and in fact will cost more than ATT's previous plan. They lowered the price because they no longer subsidize the phone under this new plan.

Basically, ATT is playing with numbers again. There's no value. If you want to save your money then go with Tmobile. Tmobile sold me an iPhone 5S for $600 while all other carriers were selling it for $650. Not to mention a 4G LTE iPad mini retina tablet for only $399 while everyone else sells them for $529. And my data for the tablet is free for life.


RE: Perhaps saving
By therealnickdanger on 8/1/2014 8:00:21 AM , Rating: 2
I'd like to point out that I just logged into my T-Mobile account and in the fine print of this 10GB Family Plan:

quote:
2.5 GB Data Per Line Offer: Limited time offer expires 9/30/14. Four-line minimum family plan; maximum of five lines. After 1/2/16, 2.5GB of 4G LTE data will automatically revert back to 1GB of 4G LTE data per line.


Right now we get 2GB of 4G per line for four lines for ~$110/mo. If I take this deal, it increases the amount of data I get for 1.5 years, but then they cut my 4G data pool in HALF! This is a short-term scam. I like my experience with TMOB so far, but let's call this what it is.


RE: Perhaps saving
By OCedHrt on 8/2/2014 7:30:13 AM , Rating: 2
Or you can just switch back after the promo expires. There is no contract.


RE: Perhaps saving
By KOOLTIME on 8/8/2014 10:53:43 PM , Rating: 2
exactly since T has no contract, even if prices changes occur your not stuck unlike the other carriers that force you into the terrible 2 year contract, so the cheap family plan next month revamp your fees, and your stuck with ETFS for 2 more years, no win for the consumer here. All of them in the fine print reserve the right to price hike at any time.


RE: Perhaps saving
By quiksilvr on 7/28/2014 10:46:25 AM , Rating: 4
I believe that what really needs to be done is the removal of contracts in the industry. That way, phone manufacturers will have to legitimately compete with the price of the phone.

The sooner we do this, the sooner we can have a nice $300 flagship device that won't be catered to the two year replacement mentality (i.e. better quality, less obtrusive operating system, etc.)


RE: Perhaps saving
By FITCamaro on 7/28/2014 11:51:38 AM , Rating: 3
In what world do you think you'll get a flagship device for $300? The off contract prices of these phones are the real world cost of them. Which currently is anywhere from $400-800 for the nicer phones. You'll get a $300 phone for $300. Which won't be a flagship device.


RE: Perhaps saving
By corduroygt on 7/28/2014 12:11:39 PM , Rating: 4
Nexus 5 is 349


RE: Perhaps saving
By teldar on 7/28/2014 5:21:33 PM , Rating: 4
Also the OnePlus One is $350 for a 64GB Snapdragon 801, 3gr ram, 5.5" LCD phone.


RE: Perhaps saving
By sigmatau on 7/29/14, Rating: 0
RE: Perhaps saving
By Bateluer on 7/29/2014 5:03:27 AM , Rating: 3
Nexuys 5 was a flagship device when it launched. Its Snapdragon 800 CPU, 2GBs of RAM, and 1080p screen still put it in the realm of high end devices though.


RE: Perhaps saving
By sigmatau on 7/29/2014 4:37:39 PM , Rating: 2
When was that? Almost a year ago?


RE: Perhaps saving
By Vinas on 7/29/2014 10:24:07 AM , Rating: 2
It's generally accepted that Nexus 5 is a 2014 flagship. Claiming that it is not because of (reasons) means you're not being rational.


RE: Perhaps saving
By sigmatau on 7/29/2014 4:35:55 PM , Rating: 1
LOL! I own one, it is a mediocre phone. Battery is soso, screen though 1080p is of low quality, and it's processor is not that great but I will give you that as there are not many other processors that are much better. Its camera is also pretty sad.

Besides that, it offers no extras, like IR remote, waterproofing, rapid charging, good camera, etc. It only offers wireless charging I do believe.

It was a flagship last year. If you want to call it a flagship, then at best it is the bottom of the barrel of flagships.

Get with the times fool.


RE: Perhaps saving
By inighthawki on 7/28/2014 12:11:49 PM , Rating: 2
I think you missed his entire point. The fact that phones are subsidized so much significantly reduces the need to compete on pricing, which means the OEMs can continue to charge such enormously high prices for the phones off-contract.

However, by having everyone pay full price, the average Joe will see an $800 price tag for the latest iPhone 10 and Galaxy S8 and will probably think twice about paying so much just for bragging rights of having the best phone. It's easy to not think about it when the phone is subsidized and you don't realize how much these phones cost you. You will see a huge influx of people buying mid-tier phones, and prices will come down as OEMs compete for business to drive their high end market.

So yes, right now you cannot get a flagship phone for $300, but that's not what he said.


RE: Perhaps saving
By retrospooty on 7/28/2014 12:17:55 PM , Rating: 3
"I think you missed his entire point. The fact that phones are subsidized so much significantly reduces the need to compete on pricing, which means the OEMs can continue to charge such enormously high prices for the phones off-contract."

Exactly... If it were not subsidized, they would be competing on price and a high end phone wouldnt cost the same as a decent laptop FFS.


RE: Perhaps saving
By Gunbuster on 7/28/2014 12:30:43 PM , Rating: 2
Indeed, if we used the cell phone pricing model a high end laptop would be $3400 and people would not even blink at the price.


RE: Perhaps saving
By amanojaku on 7/28/2014 12:47:00 PM , Rating: 3
Huh, you just described another DT poster who claims:
quote:
I have that laptop and it's easily worth more than the $3000 I paid for it. While you have to use your entire screen to watch a 1080p movie, I can write a post on DT while watching that on the side.
$3000 to do this?!? There will always be a market for people with more money than brains. Hence, "high-end" anything that's not really high-end.

Side note: Hilarious! I tried posting a link to another DT article and the spam filter stopped it! The favorite song of the of the rule set creator must be "Be aggressive! Be-ee aggressive!"


RE: Perhaps saving
By inighthawki on 7/28/2014 2:33:25 PM , Rating: 3
Do you have a reference to the post that describes what he has in the system? I know you joke, but depending on the specs it could absolutely be worth that price.


RE: Perhaps saving
By amanojaku on 7/28/2014 3:23:20 PM , Rating: 2
It was ritualm, who posted in this article:

http://www.dailytech.com/Article.aspx?newsid=36245

The spam filter trips over the link to his comment, but I already included the bulk of the quote.

It's a MacBook Pro, which I'm assuming is 15" with 8GiB. I haven't bothered to check the system specs, but it doesn't matter. For what he's doing with it (web surfing, movies, and remote login) he doesn't need a $3,000 laptop. I'm hoping he just left out what he really does on it, because he could do all that on an iPad (assuming he's brand loyal) with a keyboard or a $1,000 MacBook Air. It's like he bought a Ferrari to drive across the street when walking would do just as well.


RE: Perhaps saving
By inighthawki on 7/28/2014 3:38:50 PM , Rating: 2
Hah, yep OK. I was hoping that for $3k he had like, a gaming laptop with a high end i7, 780m, 4K display, and 32GB of RAM :)


RE: Perhaps saving
By amanojaku on 7/28/2014 7:52:31 PM , Rating: 2
Based on his reply, I see why he spec'd the machine the way he did. He purchased the Retina MacBook Pro that was infamous for not being upgradeable post-purchase (2.7GHz quad Core i7, Retina 2880x1800, GeForce 650M with 1GB [680M would be the 6-series equivalent of the 780m], 16GiB RAM, 768GB SSD, wireless-N only). If he didn't max it out, then he would have found it difficult to use in the future when applications require more RAM, CPU and disk. Which means his workloads would have to stay the same (an unreasonable expectation since he plays games) or he would have to buy a new laptop (also unreasonable given the price he paid).

Which is why I would never have purchased that system in the first place. You have to buy all your hardware upfront, even if you don't need it. With other systems, you get your hardware when you need it, which means a lower system cost when prices go down. I don't buy the claim that he couldn't find another power system that was thin and light. I recall a few systems at that time that were upgradeable, thin, light, and less expensive. The best selling points for the RMBP were the display and the size, which weren't enough of a selling point to me considering the downsides. Then again, I don't game or watch video on a screen smaller than 46". And I can't say I'd expect the mid-range 650m to perform well considering the resolution it's driving.

Whatever, he's happy he bought his machine, I'm happy I didn't.


RE: Perhaps saving
By ritualm on 7/28/14, Rating: 0
RE: Perhaps saving
By Cheesew1z69 on 7/28/2014 6:46:48 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
You're arguing that I should have spent $3000 elsewhere
Um, he is saying you spent to much for what you claim to do with it.


RE: Perhaps saving
By ritualm on 7/28/2014 10:30:56 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
Um, he is saying you spent to much for what you claim to do with it.

You could use that exact same logic against every Tesla Model S owner too! Don't bother, this isn't a fight you're going to win.


RE: Perhaps saving
By Cheesew1z69 on 7/29/2014 7:09:46 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Don't bother, this isn't a fight you're going to win.
Unlike you, I am not trying to win anything.


RE: Perhaps saving
By Vinas on 7/29/2014 10:28:32 AM , Rating: 2
There are at least two flagship phones available right now for under $400. I own them both and still shake my head when I see another dolt with a M8, G3, GN3, GS5, 5s walking around.


RE: Perhaps saving
By Gunbuster on 7/28/2014 12:13:44 PM , Rating: 2
Do you really think the "real world" cost of a $700 phone is even near that for the manufacturer?

They have been taking massive profits on phones because consumers are dumb.


RE: Perhaps saving
By FITCamaro on 7/28/2014 12:40:18 PM , Rating: 2
The GS5 was estimated to cost roughly $250 just to build. That's before software, marketing, design, or shipping. Given the amount of marketing on phones like the GS5, I'd bet there's another $100 or so added to the cost of phone. Which would put it around $350. So you'd be looking at at least $400-450 for the phone.

http://www.informationweek.com/mobile/mobile-devic...


RE: Perhaps saving
By retrospooty on 7/28/2014 12:47:24 PM , Rating: 3
Or you could use other examples... When it came out the Nexus 5 was pretty much high end, and was $350.

The point is the free market works. It drives prices down and spurs competition. The carrier subsidy model stagnates competition period. Hats off to T-Mo for breaking the gridlock. At least now we have an option.


RE: Perhaps saving
By FITCamaro on 7/28/2014 2:46:18 PM , Rating: 3
I have not said anything in opposition to T-Mobile's plans. I think it's great they're putting the other carriers on their toes hopefully with this.

My only comments have been against what I see as blatant ignorance. Sure the Nexus 5 was cheaper. But Google also doesn't have added costs to develop anything for their phones (they already make Android), hardly does any marketing themselves, and seems to be fine with selling hardware at or near cost to get their software out there which is where they make all their money.


RE: Perhaps saving
By Sonicmerlin on 7/29/2014 1:12:02 AM , Rating: 2
If the phones weren't profitable to sell, the likes of LG wouldn't bother making them for Google.

quote:
and seems to be fine with selling hardware at or near cost to get their software out there which is where they make all their money.


RE: Perhaps saving
By Reclaimer77 on 7/29/14, Rating: 0
RE: Perhaps saving
By Sonicmerlin on 7/29/2014 7:57:29 PM , Rating: 2
In what universe does Google subsidize the Nexus phones? Why the devil would they even bother to do that? Do you have any evidence whatsoever?


RE: Perhaps saving
By Cheesew1z69 on 7/29/2014 8:36:16 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
In what universe does Google subsidize the Nexus phones?
The one you are living in...


RE: Perhaps saving
RE: Perhaps saving
By Reclaimer77 on 7/28/14, Rating: 0
RE: Perhaps saving
By ritualm on 7/28/2014 4:55:00 PM , Rating: 2
I doubt the Nexus 5 costs $350 to build - its physical BOM should be closer to $150-200 IMO. All the other stuff brings its cost to $350.

Then there's the matter of Google intentionally not making much money on hardware sales, because it knows that the money's in the user data it gathers.


RE: Perhaps saving
By Sonicmerlin on 7/29/2014 1:15:23 AM , Rating: 2
Samsung and Apple are the only ones that spend that much on advertising. In the end we have high end 10" tablets with twice the BoM selling for lower retail prices than these phones. That's an obvious sign of artificially inflated phone prices.


RE: Perhaps saving
By alpha754293 on 7/28/2014 12:42:17 PM , Rating: 3
I bought my iPhone 4 outright in Canada, and yes, it was $800 at the time, but I can go to a $25/month plan, and unless I lose it or break it or have it stolen, I don't really see much of a need or incentive to ever have to buy another new phone ever again.

And even if I needed to, I can get one from Virgin Mobile US for $279 for an iPhone 4S 8 GB. It's not a great phone, but it gets the job done. (Never really understood why people absolutely have to have the latest and greatest.)

And I figured out a long time ago that the pay off period between spending the $800 up front and going on a $25/month plan vs. spending $200 up front to get the phone subsidized, but then having to go on an $85/month plan was about 10 months. (In other words, the amount I would have paid (Canada don't require contracts like in the States) for the subsized phone would have been a LOT higher than if I just bought the phone out right.)

And it also doesn't help that the general public usually aren't very good at math, let alone mental math (so that you can do the calculations in your head to find out which is a better deal).


RE: Perhaps saving
By laststop311 on 7/28/2014 10:02:49 PM , Rating: 2
well i hate iphone but if they rly do come out with a 5.5" iphone i may give it a try


RE: Perhaps saving
By GotThumbs on 7/28/2014 1:10:08 PM , Rating: 2
It's NOT just the cost of hardware.

There are licensing fees that are paid based on patents.

It's not as basic as some may think.

Personally, I use Page Plus via KittyWireless. Brought my own phone and only pay 29.97 mo for 1200 talk, 3000 text and 500mb of data. More than enough for my needs. No contract and you can simply buy a newer phone and they will swap number to the new phone.

fyi. Page Plus uses Verizon network, so no coverage issues.

~Best wishes with your choices.


RE: Perhaps saving
By Gunbuster on 7/28/2014 2:30:31 PM , Rating: 2
Oh of course, those fees make a high end phone cost 11X more than a budget model. Sure.


RE: Perhaps saving
By Sonicmerlin on 7/29/2014 1:13:20 AM , Rating: 2
Licensing is a tiny fraction of overall costs. If they weren't then how could Motorola or Nokia sell phones for <$100?


RE: Perhaps saving
By Vinas on 7/29/2014 10:29:19 AM , Rating: 2
^^ this exactly... the masses are very slow to catch on.


RE: Perhaps saving
By Bateluer on 7/29/2014 5:04:20 AM , Rating: 2
It should be noted that the bill of materials for even high end flagship phones is under 250 dollars. Charging 800 dollars(Sony), is a hell of a market, even accounting for R&D costs.


RE: Perhaps saving
By soccerballtux on 7/28/2014 4:21:18 PM , Rating: 2
an no carrier will ever invest in upgrading their network again. which is exactly why over three-quarters of europe is still on 3G.

I don't know why I even bothered responding.


RE: Perhaps saving
By techxx on 7/28/2014 10:50:58 AM , Rating: 2
T-Mobile provides the option to finance the phone over 2 years, but you can buy it outright anytime you want. If you like a new phone once a year, T-Mobile might be ideal because you can buy the phone out and sell it anytime you choose, putting that money towards a new phone.

For the cost conscious, T-Mobile provides excellent savings if you especially stick to used phones. Throw the SIM card in and you have one really low phone payment. Whether you take advantage of T-Mobile or not, there's no doubt they give way more power to the consumer than VZW and AT&T.


RE: Perhaps saving
By GotThumbs on 7/28/2014 1:12:32 PM , Rating: 2
Seems reasonable.

But how is T's coverage compared to Verizon?


RE: Perhaps saving
By FITCamaro on 7/28/2014 2:49:16 PM , Rating: 2
I don't know a single person who uses T-Mobile. Because of its network vs AT&T and Verizon.

Look at the coverage maps. They're not 100% accurate but just the covered area is a pretty big difference.


RE: Perhaps saving
By Harinezumi on 7/28/2014 8:07:48 PM , Rating: 2
Depends on where you live. If you're out in the boondocks, you pretty much have no choice but Verizon. If you live in a major city and are not planning on spending much time outside of major cities, T-Mobile is no worse than AT&T or Verizon.

In downtown Seattle, at least, T-Mobile's coverage is actually better! Their international data roaming seems to be much more consumer-friendly as well.


RE: Perhaps saving
By FITCamaro on 7/29/2014 9:41:35 AM , Rating: 2
It absolutely does. Buy the best value for your dollar that has the best or at least acceptable reception.


RE: Perhaps saving
By retrospooty on 7/28/2014 8:55:26 PM , Rating: 2
"But how is T's coverage compared to Verizon?"

These days, it's great in most major metro areas... Smaller towns and rural areas, you'd have to check where you live and visit often.


RE: Perhaps saving
By invidious on 7/28/2014 11:02:17 AM , Rating: 4
I'm pretty sure ATT's $160/month plan does not subsadize phone costs. Only their tranditional plans did that which costed over $200 for four lines.

My math shows the new ATT plans cost consumers more than the old ATT plans assuming everyone is buying a new expensive phone every two years (which has been the norm). Which explains why ATT is so eager to push it onto people. Tmobile's new plan would be cheaper than either ATT plan.

Old ATT costs:

$200/mo x 24 mo = $4800
$200/phone x 4 phones = $800
2 year total = $5600 ($233/mo)

New ATT costs:

$160/mo x 24 mo = $3840
$600/phone x 4 phones = $2400
2 year total = $6240 (260/mo)

New Tmobile costs:
$100/mo x 24 mo = $2440
$600/phone x 4 phones = $2400
2 year total = $4840 ($202/mo)


RE: Perhaps saving
By Dr. Kenneth Noisewater on 7/28/2014 12:30:03 PM , Rating: 2
Knock $1000 off by going with Nexus 5.


RE: Perhaps saving
By Gunbuster on 7/28/2014 12:40:15 PM , Rating: 2
Knock even more off going with a Lumia 521.
Don't forget about phone insurance. You wont need that with a $40 Lumia ;)


RE: Perhaps saving
By Dr of crap on 7/28/2014 12:33:19 PM , Rating: 2
Soooo basically, what I'm paying now, with
Sprint "subsidizing" the phone for me and my family each month at a cost of $200 monthly.

So why did we need to make this switch again? The one where the monthly service charge and the phone cost are separate from each other.

HOW many will go into a cell phone store, and just out right pay full price for the phone and then JUST pay the monthly bill?? Answer - the amount of people that go to buy a car and are not ONLY concerned with the monthly payment! Meaning NOT MANY!


RE: Perhaps saving
By GotThumbs on 7/28/2014 1:15:09 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
I'm pretty sure ATT's $160/month plan does not subsidize phone costs.


You are correct.


RE: Perhaps saving
By sigmatau on 7/29/2014 3:37:45 AM , Rating: 2
"I'm pretty sure ATT's $160/month plan does not subsadize phone costs"

You would be pretty wrong.


RE: Perhaps saving
By Dr. Kenneth Noisewater on 7/28/2014 12:28:42 PM , Rating: 2
Better to buy the unlocked phone and pay monthly or outright than be locked into a carrier for an extra $15/phone/month.


RE: Perhaps saving
By amanojaku on 7/28/2014 12:49:45 PM , Rating: 3
That would make sense, except phones are often tied to a carrier and physically incapable of connecting to another carrier's frequencies. We need to eliminate THAT roadblock, first.


RE: Perhaps saving
By CharonPDX on 7/28/2014 1:30:47 PM , Rating: 2
While "traditional plans" work great for people who upgrade their phones every two years on the dot, for my family, T-Mobile has already been cheaper - and this makes it even moreso.

We only upgrade every 3-4 years, and alternate whose phone gets updated, so we're saving a LOT on T-Mobile. (It also helps that by the time we moved to T-Mobile, we already had phones from AT&T that were now unlocked and no longer on contract.)

We're about to upgrade one of our phones, and so T-Mobile's "pay 1/24th the price of the phone each month for 24 months" will be about $22/month. Even at that, we're still WAY under the other carriers' prices.


RE: Perhaps saving
By BifurcatedBoat on 7/28/2014 7:18:03 PM , Rating: 2
Which brings you to the question of whether you really want to spend $800 on your phone.

If you do really feel that flagship is worth it, maybe this isn't such a great deal for you, but nowadays you can get a pretty nice phone for half that.

If I was convinced the service would be good, I'd buy my own devices off contract. I may have to look into T-mobile again.


RE: Perhaps saving
By jeffbui on 7/29/2014 10:06:29 AM , Rating: 2
You don't get that subsidized pricing with AT&T. If you want subsidized pricing, that $160 plan becomes $200


Legere is a badass.
By flyingpants1 on 7/28/2014 10:36:55 AM , Rating: 5
Gotta respect this guy, he is disrupting the industry.

Surprised he dared to use the word rape in today's PC culture.




RE: Legere is a badass.
By DukeN on 7/28/14, Rating: -1
RE: Legere is a badass.
By Cheesew1z69 on 7/28/2014 10:57:02 AM , Rating: 2
What clue is he supposed to get? He is correct.


RE: Legere is a badass.
By retrospooty on 7/28/2014 11:06:49 AM , Rating: 2
What exactly is the issue? The OP was simply referring to Legeres rant... And it wasn't even about "rape" , it was used as a metaphor... As in Verizon and ATT are "raping" you with their ridiculous draconian policies.


RE: Legere is a badass.
By FITCamaro on 7/28/2014 11:53:52 AM , Rating: 1
So now it's harsh to charge what they feel like charging you for a luxury item you WANT, not need, to have? Ultimately you agree to pay it. If you don't like it, don't pay for it.


RE: Legere is a badass.
By retrospooty on 7/28/2014 12:15:58 PM , Rating: 2
I am not sure what you are saying... I was just pointing out what Legere said. And that is exactly what he was communicating. At least in the US, you used to have to choose between one or another carrier that had some pretty crappy policies. His pitch is if you are tired of that, come to T-Mobile, we don't do that (any more).


RE: Legere is a badass.
By inighthawki on 7/28/2014 12:24:20 PM , Rating: 2
So because something is not a necessity to life, it makes it OK to overcharge people and rip them off simply because "it's a luxury item?"


RE: Legere is a badass.
By FITCamaro on 7/28/2014 12:42:23 PM , Rating: 1
A product is worth what people are willing to pay for it.


RE: Legere is a badass.
By inighthawki on 7/28/2014 1:46:43 PM , Rating: 3
That doesn't hold true when the only services offering that product don't compete because they are essentially monopolies or price fix with each other.

My parents live in a small rural region in Ohio. Their only option for internet access is a pretty poor ISP that charges them $50 a month for a 3Mbps connection, which sometimes they are lucky when they get it. They have no alternatives. They pay for it, though, because internet access is pretty much a requirement for people in modern societies. Just because they are willing to pay for it, doesn't make the price justified.

TMobile is simply starting to make people realize what is happening with cell providers - they are robbing you blind. This is what competition is for. To let you know that the product is NOT worth what you're paying for it.


RE: Legere is a badass.
By FITCamaro on 7/28/2014 2:59:38 PM , Rating: 1
And that is the price they pay for living in a small rural region in Ohio. Fast, cheap internet is not a right. There are tradeoffs for living in the middle of nowhere. Building out more infrastructure to bring better internet to them is not a priority because there is no profit in it for the company.

And you thinking T-Mobile is any different is absurd. T-Mobile wants to make money just like AT&T and Verizon. They don't have as good a network as AT&T or Verizon so they're offering lowering prices to try and pull people away. What you're reading is just marketing to make you think you're getting the same service at a lower price. But the fact is you're not. Now in your local area, T-Mobile might work great in which case it'd be a good deal. But if you don't, then it isn't. The same goes for any other carrier in different areas. Verizon has by far the best coverage here in the Charleston area. So pretty much everyone I know has it.


RE: Legere is a badass.
By inighthawki on 7/28/2014 3:56:16 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
And that is the price they pay for living in a small rural region in Ohio. Fast, cheap internet is not a right. There are tradeoffs for living in the middle of nowhere. Building out more infrastructure to bring better internet to them is not a priority because there is no profit in it for the company.

You're driving my point home. They live in a region where that ISP basically has a monopoly on the area, therefore they are forced to be charged excessive amounts for low quality service. It's clearly a price that is not justifiable for the quality of the service.

This same concept applies to cell services. AT&T and Verizon own the market. They don't really compete with each other, and both charge way more than their service is worth. But people are either dumb or are forced to pay it if they want a cell phone and want to be part of a modern society. You can go ahead and say "but inighthawki, a cell phone isn't REQUIRED to live in society!" But the truth is, it basically is. We live in a world where it's no longer acceptable to really be out of contact with each other. Sure your 6 year old does not need an LTE enabled iPad, but the family of 4 with teenagers in high school or college benefit greatly from these services. Many people need cell phones for work as well. They have jobs where they are on call at all times, or need to remain connected to their work email and calendar events.

So you want to call me a self entitled whiner? I call you a corporate shill. You go ahead and live your life believing that everything you pay for is worth the price just because someone set the price and another person paid it. That doesn't make you correct.


RE: Legere is a badass.
By Reclaimer77 on 7/28/14, Rating: 0
RE: Legere is a badass.
By FITCamaro on 7/29/2014 9:50:29 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
They live in a region where that ISP basically has a monopoly on the area, therefore they are forced to be charged excessive amounts for low quality service. It's clearly a price that is not justifiable for the quality of the service.


That is the government's fault. Don't demand that the government force them to offer lower prices and/or better service. Demand that government get out of it and allow competition in. If there is room for profit potential, someone else will eventually come in. Or that community could decide to build out its own municipal wifi. But there are tradeoffs for living in the middle of nowhere.

quote:
We live in a world where it's no longer acceptable to really be out of contact with each other. Sure your 6 year old does not need an LTE enabled iPad, but the family of 4 with teenagers in high school or college benefit greatly from these services. Many people need cell phones for work as well. They have jobs where they are on call at all times, or need to remain connected to their work email and calendar events.


Sure we can. Plenty of people do it. You don't need a smart phone. Or even a phone. We survived for millennia without it. In more recent history, we did just fine in the 60s, 70s, 80s, and 90s without them. Jobs where you have to be on call generally provide a phone too. Mine does. Sure you benefit from these things but they are ultimately luxuries and nice to haves, not required for life. It is in your mind that you need a smartphone. But the fact is, before you had one, you had a full and happy life. Of course you might be too young to not have had one. My parents didn't need me to have a smartphone or even a phone when I was a teenager. I told them where I'd be and they trusted me. For times they picked me up, we agreed on a place and time and we both stuck to it (generally).

No I'll live my life believing everything I pay for is worth the price because I'm willing to pay it. If I don't believe something is worth the price, I won't buy it. Not demand the government make it cheaper or better for me. Because I don't have a right to any product anyone sells. Commerce is supposed to be a mutually beneficial arrangement between two parties. Not one side trying to tell the other what the arrangement will be through the power of the government because they want what the other has but doesn't want to pay what they're charging for it.


RE: Legere is a badass.
By FITCamaro on 7/28/2014 3:11:24 PM , Rating: 2
At the end of the day you are acting like a self entitled whiner who thinks he or she should have the right to tell a business what they're going to pay or what the terms of a contract with the business will be. You have one way in most consumer transactions to express that right. By deciding whether or not to do business with them.

Next you're going to tell me how you should be able to dictate to credit card companies, banks, etc what interest rates you'll pay.

Why don't you try to tell DailyTech how you'll use their service. See how that works out for you.


RE: Legere is a badass.
By inighthawki on 7/28/2014 3:49:10 PM , Rating: 2
You're right. They are a business trying to make profit therefore and people buy their service, therefore it's not at all possible that they are ripping people off.

I bet you also believe that a common scammer on the street is an OK guy because he tricked people into believing what they paid for his product was reasonable.

Companies like AT&T and Verizon are out their making record profits per quarter while gouging the quality of the service they provide to their users. Instead of reinvesting money into their infrastructure, they line their pockets and limit people to data caps and overcharge them for what they use. You went over your cap by 5KB? That'll be an extra $15.

It's not hard to see what a poor deal you're getting by buying into these services, but with no competition they can do whatever they want, and you're forced to pay it if you want it.


RE: Legere is a badass.
By FITCamaro on 7/29/2014 10:04:34 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
I bet you also believe that a common scammer on the street is an OK guy because he tricked people into believing what they paid for his product was reasonable.


There is a difference between lying about your product and telling you what it is. So no, they're not the same. Cell phone companies aren't lying about their products. You get what you pay for.

quote:
Companies like AT&T and Verizon are out their making record profits per quarter while gouging the quality of the service they provide to their users. Instead of reinvesting money into their infrastructure, they line their pockets and limit people to data caps and overcharge them for what they use. You went over your cap by 5KB? That'll be an extra $15.


Completely irrelevant to the argument. That's their business. Your business is deciding whether or not their prices are to your liking and their service meets your needs. Not how much money they make. You can have an opinion into their business ethics and what they do with their money, but its not relevant to a discussion as to whether or not they're doing anything wrong. And its a blatant lie that they're not reinvesting into their infrastructure. They're still building their infrastructure. All of them.

quote:
It's not hard to see what a poor deal you're getting by buying into these services


So don't pay for the service if its such a poor deal. Period.

quote:
but with no competition they can do whatever they want


If there were no competition, we would not be discussing this because this article would not exist. The very fact that this article was written and we're debating it shows there is competition because that's exactly what the article is about! Competition!

quote:
and you're forced to pay it if you want it


That's true of every product or service. If you want it, you pay for it. That's how the world works.


RE: Legere is a badass.
By Reclaimer77 on 7/28/2014 4:09:49 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
That doesn't hold true when the only services offering that product don't compete because they are essentially monopolies or price fix with each other.


Why are you confusing landline based ISP's with cellular providers?

As far as I can tell, there is no "monopoly" when it comes to cellular service.

quote:
Just because they are willing to pay for it, doesn't make the price justified.


Wait up now, let's be clear. Are you saying they're being charged an special higher "rural Ohio" rate nobody else has to pay, or that's just the standard package for that ISP?

If it's the former, I could understand your argument maybe. However I suspect it's the latter, in which case, tough cookies! The price is what it is. What needs to be "justified"?


RE: Legere is a badass.
By inighthawki on 7/28/2014 4:31:16 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Why are you confusing landline based ISP's with cellular providers?

I'm not. In the US, there are only a couple cell providers. Basically AT&T, Verizon, Sprint, and TMobile, and a few other unknown providers. Until just recently TMobile was pretty unknown by most people too - or just considered an inadequate network. Today AT&T and Verizon basically form a duopoly. They barely compete with each other because they don't really need to, and both overcharge their customers. Now with people like TMobile stepping up their game, and others following along, this is becoming no longer the case.

quote:
Are you saying they're being charged an special higher "rural Ohio" rate nobody else has to pay, or that's just the standard package for that ISP?

I'm saying that they are the ONLY broadband provider in the area, and as a result they charge what they want. 5 miles away you can get Time Warner cable for like $40 or $50 and get a 20Mb connection, but since Timer Warner isn't in the area, the ISP overcharges because they have no competition (ironic to say about TW...)


RE: Legere is a badass.
By Reclaimer77 on 7/28/14, Rating: 0
RE: Legere is a badass.
By inighthawki on 7/28/2014 4:47:44 PM , Rating: 2
I did not call them Monopolies. I assume you are referring to my post where I was referring to products or services in general, and how "the product is worth what the user pays" is not true in every scenario. I am almost certain the latter portion of my comment about price fixing is almost certainly true, as neither AT&T nor Verizon really competed with one another, and no other cell company until just recently had enough infrastructure or quality of service to really compete.


RE: Legere is a badass.
By Reclaimer77 on 7/28/14, Rating: -1
RE: Legere is a badass.
By inighthawki on 7/28/2014 4:34:58 PM , Rating: 2
A luxury item is not the same as a product that simply isn't a need.

quote:
Is it "okay" that Audi charges a huge premium for what is essentially a Volkswagon?

Well I'm not an expert in cars so I don't know the quality differences between the products. But when there is competition, then yeah, people may pay more for a brand name over something more generic.


RE: Legere is a badass.
By Spuke on 7/28/2014 12:37:07 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
So now it's harsh to charge what they feel like charging you for a luxury item you WANT, not need, to have?
WTF are you talking about?


RE: Legere is a badass.
By FITCamaro on 7/28/2014 12:43:55 PM , Rating: 1
He called their policies draconian. Their policy is to charge you what they want to charge you and you agree to pay. I was asking if that is now considered harsh (draconian).


RE: Legere is a badass.
By nolisi on 7/28/2014 1:09:04 PM , Rating: 2
I think you're oversimplifying/overreducing what he's referring to as draconian- effectively you're changing what he's saying- and it just seems like you don't want to hear what he's saying.

But I'll break it down for you if need be. He's not just saying "charginge you what they feel like charging you is draconian". Policies extend to more than just price for the service (I'm surprised I need to explain what this means to you). Price for the service is part of their policy.

Another part of their "policy" is to contracts that consumers can't negotiate. And quite honestly, I'm pretty sure one of their policies is to bait unaware consumers into these contracts. Charging overages for data whose very state is temporary across their network is another policy.

Maybe ask what which policies he's talking about and arguing against the points he's making instead of just assuming what he means- it makes you look less like an idiot and more thoughtful.

Honestly, the free market only functions well when consumers and service providers are both empowered and completely free. If your business relies on unempowered, uninformed consumers to thrive, then maybe you shouldn't be a business.


RE: Legere is a badass.
By FITCamaro on 7/28/2014 3:05:14 PM , Rating: 1
Tell me about a single contract that a consumer signs that they can negotiate on.

quote:
If your business relies on unempowered, uninformed consumers to thrive, then maybe you shouldn't be a business.


And that's for you to decide now huh? These are the biggest potentials for profit for businesses. And it's no one's fault but those consumers. No one is stopping them from educating themselves but themselves.

Being dishonest is wrong. Always. But selling something that people want for a price they're willing to pay is not. You are completely free not to buy something. Like a smart phone or internet. You will not die without them. You can get by with a simple regular phone and no internet. Sure there will be aspects of your life that will be more complicated. Like paying bills. But you will live. A full, happy, healthy life.


RE: Legere is a badass.
By Cheesew1z69 on 7/28/2014 4:12:38 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Tell me about a single contract that a consumer signs that they can negotiate on.
Car? Home?


RE: Legere is a badass.
By FITCamaro on 7/29/2014 9:58:36 AM , Rating: 2
I'm talking about the terms of the agreement after you've already agreed on a price. In the case of cell phones, service prices are not negotiable. Nor will they ever be. With a home or car, you can negotiate on the price and rate. If you don't like either, you don't buy. You don't get to negotiate terms like whether or not you have to pay PMI when you don't have the necessary down payment. Or what happens if you don't pay the mortgage. Those are set in stone. Similar to the terms of service that we were speaking about in regards to cell phones. Like paying overage fees if you go over your data allotment. And no business will negotiate terms like that with you. They'll tell you to get lost.


RE: Legere is a badass.
By Reclaimer77 on 7/28/2014 4:12:05 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
If your business relies on unempowered, uninformed consumers to thrive, then maybe you shouldn't be a business.


Time for Apple to close their doors then :P hehehe....


RE: Legere is a badass.
By retrospooty on 7/28/2014 3:08:35 PM , Rating: 2
Its more than just their prices. That is a choice. The locking you in to a contract, the not allowing you to activate a smartphone without a data plan, the not unlcoking phones when you leave are 3 good examples. And you are right, if you dont like those draconian policies, you dont have to sign up... But the issue before is that we had 4 major carriers with the same basic policies... Now we have 1 that is changing things up, and that is a good thing.


RE: Legere is a badass.
By FITCamaro on 7/28/2014 3:15:38 PM , Rating: 2
THEN DON'T GET THE PHONE OR USE THE SERVICE! It's really that simple.

I agree that one changing things up is good. But don't whine about how bad the other companies are if you're still using their service. I hated a particular local internet company. You know what I did? I moved. I didn't go around saying that I should be able to dictate terms to them of how they should give me service, what I should pay, etc.

It's like cable/satellite right now. I don't like the options I have. So you know what I do? I don't pay for either. I just get Hulu and Netflix. And if they weren't around, I'd just have my OTA antenna and buy shows on DVD/Bluray and watch them.


RE: Legere is a badass.
By FITCamaro on 7/28/2014 3:16:24 PM , Rating: 2
Or I'd decide that it was still worth it to pay for it and do so. Sure I'd want it to improve still. But I wouldn't say I have the right to tell them to give me something better than what they're offering.


RE: Legere is a badass.
By retrospooty on 7/28/2014 4:37:03 PM , Rating: 2
"But don't whine about how bad the other companies are if you're still using their service"

No-one was whining. Read it again. Someone took issue with the word "rape" that Legere used to describe what ATT And Verizon do to their customers and other people explained what he meant... You then went off on a soapbox of sorts.


RE: Legere is a badass.
By Spuke on 7/28/2014 6:17:01 PM , Rating: 2
Damn, all of you make good points.


Love what he is doing.
By elkinm on 7/28/2014 1:15:46 PM , Rating: 2
I love TMobile. I am paying much less now then ever before.
I wonder how this will effect existing cheaper plans with less data or will 2.5 GB become the new minimum.

One issue with Tmobile is that they are loosing their roaming contracts. Tmobiles network is suffering because they used to be able to roam on ATTs network almost anywhere, but now there are many areas outside major cities where TMobile has poor or no service.
If TMobile can improve their coverage there will be no reason to go with anyone else.

As for phones, TMobiles offerings are still extremely overpriced unless you go with the latest and greatest option. Then again that hold true for all the subsidized phones as well. Prices for older and cheaper phones don't go down fast enough so you are better off buying you own or going aftermarket, but then you loose any insurance coverage you might have.




RE: Love what he is doing.
By FITCamaro on 7/28/2014 3:18:22 PM , Rating: 2
Why do you think they're offering lower prices? Because their network isn't as good so they have to offer lower costs.


RE: Love what he is doing.
By toooooot on 7/28/2014 4:06:28 PM , Rating: 3
"These high and mighty duopolists that are raping you for every penny you have, if they could do something nice for you they would. The f--kers hate you."

I couldn't agree more. I am with verizon.


RE: Love what he is doing.
By retrospooty on 7/28/2014 4:46:21 PM , Rating: 4
Yup... I was with them too. We moved my wife over as soon as they offered to pay the early term fees. The service has been perfect, and much cheaper. If I were not on a separate company paid Verizon account I would run, not walk, to my car and speed to the nearest T-Mo store right now and get T-Mo immediately and Verizon could kiss my ass in the rear view mirror.


Read the Fine Print Much?
By sigmatau on 7/29/2014 3:36:26 AM , Rating: 2
"Offer ends 9/30/14. Pricing for 4 lines only 2.5 GB data per line/month until 1/2/16; then 1GB data per line. Taxes & fees addit’l. Visit t-mobile.com for offer and coverage details"

This converts from a 10GB plan to a 4GB plan after 16 months.




By MadMan007 on 7/29/2014 7:18:56 AM , Rating: 2
T-Mobile can afford to have cheaper plans because their network is much smaller with worse coverage. It's great for people for whom it will work, but in my area once you get away from major roads and towns T-Mo's coverage is very spotty compared to AT&T. But at least this guy is entertaining.




Verizon and ATT plans
By hifiaudio2 on 7/30/2014 10:26:04 AM , Rating: 2
Correct me if I am wrong please, but don't both Verizon and Att's "~$160" plans REQUIRE you to purchase a new phone from them and amortize it over 24 months? I wanted to move to the plan on my Verizon account but they told me that I am not eligible for the discount per line if I don't buy a new phone and have it be part of the plan. I.e. I cannot simply use my Galaxy Note 3 that I paid full price for (because I didnt want to lose unlimited data). We have no current phones under contract. I was going to move to the new plan but didn't when I was told I would HAVE to buy new phones for each line to get the per line discount. And then at the end of 24 months when the phones were paid for I would have to start the process all over again with new phones. This is what was told to me on the phone by a Verizon CSR. Was I misinformed? Does ATT do the same thing? I would be OK with buying new ATT phones for full price (or used) if I can indeed get 10gb of shared data for $160 without having to buy another phone until I am ready.




"Nowadays you can buy a CPU cheaper than the CPU fan." -- Unnamed AMD executive














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki