Mobile Rates Going Up Due to 2 Year Plan Changes

[cam_wmh]

Originally Posted by nfotiu

Subsidized phones are evil, I wish they'd just abandon that model altogether. Then we'd see some real price competitiveness on unlocked phones. Companies should be able to sell a good smartphone for close to $200 outright.

A mobile touch screen computer with latest chipset, in a slick easy to use package, for $200?
LOL.

You should write the CRTC, over those big horrible, Canadian telco companies; Samsung, Motorola, Apple & petition them to legislate their pricing too.

[cam_wmh]

Originally Posted by Bobblehead

And if it was a competitive market with full information, laissez faire may work.

But it isn't - it is an oligopoly with large economies of scale, large barriers to entry and getting information is difficult.

I doubt even Verizon changes things much. They will initially create a price war to build up their client base and prices will drop across the board. But once their client base starts to be sustainable they will raise prices and the others will follow suit.

It takes more than 3 or 4 entrants for it to be a competitive market place that drives down prices.

Verizon would still be a re-branded Wind/Mobilicity, bargain entry player, until they start planting towers like weeds. That's an easy $10bn investment to bring their service level close to on par with what they have in the U.S, like I dunno - implementing LTE.

[ken0042]

Originally Posted by cam_wmh

A mobile touch screen computer with latest chipset, in a slick easy to use package, for $200?
LOL.

You should have a look at pricing overseas:
http://dx.com/c/cell-phone-599/cell-...e&sortType=asc

There are some pretty decent phones in that $200 price range; unlocked and ready to use on any carrier.

I would be curious to see what Telus pays Apple for iPhones. I'm guessing it's nowhere near the $700 retail price.

[cam_wmh]

Originally Posted by ken0042

You should have a look at pricing overseas:
http://dx.com/c/cell-phone-599/cell-...e&sortType=asc

There are some pretty decent phones in that $200 price range; unlocked and ready to use on any carrier.

hahaha. You referenced a Deal Extreme product. Are any of those things up to date?


Perused both cataloges.
http://mobility.telus.com/en/AB/sams...FWJqMgodLg4A6Q

vs

http://dx.com/p/samsung-galaxy-ace-p...s-black-150987

Originally Posted by ken0042

You should have a look at pricing overseas:

I would be curious to see what Telus pays Apple for iPhones. I'm guessing it's nowhere near the $700 retail price.

Probably at a profitable price-point.

[ken0042]

Originally Posted by cam_wmh

hahaha. You referenced a Deal Extreme product. Are any of those things up to date?

Yes they are.

I don't understand why you refuse to believe that there aren't huge margins being made with smartphones. It almost sounds like you are trying to make us believe some company's propeganda.

[cam_wmh]

From a quick glance, looks like Moore's law at play to me. (sorry about all the edits ^ )

[cam_wmh]

Originally Posted by ken0042

Yes they are.

I don't understand why you refuse to believe that there aren't huge margins being made with smartphones. It almost sounds like you are trying to make us believe some company's propeganda.

Reference the model I found in TELUS catalog after simply searching "Samsung Ace TELUS".

Those $50 products are the meat & potatoes of the DX catalog, and hence my laughter. I've bought many a product from them, and their low budget products are exactly that. Low budget.

[cDnStealth]

The real question is why if you buy your phone separately do you have to pay the subsidized price for a plan. Or why that subsidized price continues after you're plan is over and you don't upgrade to a new phone.

[nfotiu]

Originally Posted by cam_wmh

A mobile touch screen computer with latest chipset, in a slick easy to use package, for $200?
LOL.

You should write the CRTC, over those big horrible, Canadian telco companies; Samsung, Motorola, Apple & petition them to legislate their pricing too.

Tablets with pretty much the same innards are less than $200. The Nexus 4 phone is $299. If everyone was paying for their phones outright, there would be a lot more competitively priced options.

Lots of talk that the Moto X might try to break the current pricing model with a low off contract price.

[ken0042]

Originally Posted by cam_wmh

Those $50 products are the meat & potatoes of the DX catalog, and hence my laughter.

That's why I suggested going up to the $200 price range. As you noted Telus also has one available in that range; about the same price as DX.

That was pretty much my point- a $200 smartphone isn't that crazy. They exist today.

[cam_wmh]

Originally Posted by nfotiu

Tablets with pretty much the same innards are less than $200. The Nexus 4 phone is $299. If everyone was paying for their phones outright, there would be a lot more competitively priced options.

Lots of talk that the Moto X might try to break the current pricing model with a low off contract price.

I think Motorola is just trying to get back into the game, and pricing is all they have left working for them.

For those devices at the $200-$300 price-point, "pretty much the same" they are not. They are previous generation devices.

People are buying cool. Cool is expensive. Cool is the latest chipset.

Price out an iPhone 4 vs iPhone 5. Which is why I at glance suggest Moores.

[cam_wmh]

Originally Posted by cam_wmh

A mobile touch screen computer with latest chipset, in a slick easy to use package, for $200?
LOL.

You should write the CRTC, over those big horrible, Canadian telco companies; Samsung, Motorola, Apple & petition them to legislate their pricing too.

Just need to reinforce that point.

[Jimmy Stang]

My next device will certainly be unsubsidized and unlocked. I am fortunate enough to have a 6 gig data plan (on a 3-year term), and although excessive, I wouldn't want to relinquish it. Hopefully there is a way to renegotiate the same type of plan but with a lower cost due to the fact that there will be no phone subsidizing tacked on. Wishful thinking perhaps. But I have over a year to see how everything pans out.

[Anduril]

Originally Posted by Jimmy Stang

My next device will certainly be unsubsidized and unlocked. I am fortunate enough to have a 6 gig data plan (on a 3-year term), and although excessive, I wouldn't want to relinquish it. Hopefully there is a way to renegotiate the same type of plan but with a lower cost due to the fact that there will be no phone subsidizing tacked on. Wishful thinking perhaps. But I have over a year to see how everything pans out.

Fat chance as the moment old plans are removed, the codes are no longer allowed to be applied. For an overhaul like this, no way that you're going to even get the same plan much less it for less.

Looks like I'm either going to have to baby my Note II for a lot longer than I thought, get the next Nexus or come into some money to feed my desire for a new toy.

Originally Posted by nfotiu

Tablets with pretty much the same innards are less than $200. The Nexus 4 phone is $299. If everyone was paying for their phones outright, there would be a lot more competitively priced options.

Lots of talk that the Moto X might try to break the current pricing model with a low off contract price.

Though the production costs for tablets are less than a phone just because of how specific manufacturing needs to be with such a precise device (though getting bigger) like a cellphone.

Hasn't the Nexus 4 already 'technically' broken the current pricing model? Or are we talking about smashing every and all conception of it?

[PsYcNeT]

Originally Posted by cam_wmh

I think Motorola is just trying to get back into the game, and pricing is all they have left working for them.

For those devices at the $200-$300 price-point, "pretty much the same" they are not. They are previous generation devices.

People are buying cool. Cool is expensive. Cool is the latest chipset.

Price out an iPhone 4 vs iPhone 5. Which is why I at glance suggest Moores.

Nexus 4 has been $300 since launch and unlocked, and is still one of the fastest phones on the market.

Google has said their next Nexus phone will be priced the same with newer hardware.

Explain why an S4 (slower than a Nexus 4) has double the price point of a Nexus 4.

[accord1999]

Originally Posted by cDnStealth

The real question is why if you buy your phone separately do you have to pay the subsidized price for a plan. Or why that subsidized price continues after you're plan is over and you don't upgrade to a new phone.

Same reason why season ticket holders get a discount off the face value of tickets, a relatively secure stream of revenue has value.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by Street Pharmacist

Ffs. The point of government intervention is to protect the consumer NOT to make things cheaper.

Increase competition? Sure makes sense (not that they did a good job of it). Remove sneaky contracts that prey on uniformed consumers? Maybe.

How does cheaper prices protect the consumer? The carriers Should be able to offer different prices for merchandise based on financial contracts, etc.

It seems as though many people would like to see the government force companies to change business models to provide the cheapest communications charges. Sorry, but that is most certainly NOT the role of the government imo

The mobile phone market is an oligopoly. A small number of players and very high barriers to entry. As such it doesn't provide the benefits that capitalism normally provides. In these cases governments need to intervene to ensure the consumer is protected.

One of these protections is a fair price. Normally capitalism produces the lowest possible price at acceptable quality at a price that allows profit. Anti-monopoly measures also tend to prevent the forced bundling of services.

A good example is real estate, for quite a while in order access MLS you were required to purchase a full service realator. You couldn't just purchase the MLS service. This is the same as the current phone companies, you don't save money if you don't buy a device. The government needs to step in and mandate that the device be de-coupled from the plan.

The benefit to the consumer is that now companies have to compete on both the cost of the device, and on the cost of the plan. This is more transparent and allows consumers choice.

[Jimmy Stang]

Originally Posted by Anduril

Fat chance as the moment old plans are removed, the codes are no longer allowed to be applied. For an overhaul like this, no way that you're going to even get the same plan much less it for less.

Hopefully, if Verizon enters the market and shakes things up a little bit, there will some competition for the current oligopoly and consumers will see some better deals. Having an unlocked phone gives you the leverage to play the providers against each other, but all that really means is that you get to pick the provider who screws you the most gently.

[cam_wmh]

Originally Posted by PsYcNeT

Nexus 4 has been $300 since launch and unlocked, and is still one of the fastest phones on the market.

Google has said their next Nexus phone will be priced the same with newer hardware.

Explain why an S4 (slower than a Nexus 4) has double the price point of a Nexus 4.

Because it's cooler.

[cam_wmh]

Originally Posted by Jimmy Stang

Hopefully, if Verizon enters the market and shakes things up a little bit, there will some competition for the current oligopoly and consumers will see some better deals. Having an unlocked phone gives you the leverage to play the providers against each other, but all that really means is that you get to pick the provider who screws you the most gently.

Originally Posted by cam_wmh

Verizon would still be a re-branded Wind/Mobilicity, bargain entry player, until they start planting towers like weeds. That's an easy $10bn investment to bring their service level close to on par with what they have in the U.S, like I dunno - implementing LTE.

Are Verizon's prices cheaper?

They have the pockets, and when word got it they're sniffing around, they affected the stock prices of Canada's big 3. That said, they still need to invest in substantial infrastructure.