- 11-08-2012, 01:08 PM #2
It's likely that the much smaller volume of CDMA handsets = higher costs per handset (which are passed on to the end consumer).
It also looks like HTC is NOT going the low-margin route on the 8X. Pricing may be the 8X's Achilles' heel.
- 11-08-2012, 09:38 PM #4
11-08-2012, 10:26 PM #5
- 166 Posts
- 0 Post(s)
- 0 Thread(s)
Making a 720p 4.3" screen is a bigger technical challenge than making one 4.7" The processor is still just shy of the tip top of the line too.
Besides, according to The Verge it's only $100 more. The AT&T 920 price is subsidized even without the contract, that's the reason it's so cheap.
- 11-14-2012, 06:01 PM #6
what's the best guess about when, if ever, the Verizon off contract price for the HTC 8x will drop from its current $540? I really don't want to give up my unlimited wireless data plan, but I'm not sure I want to spend 600 bucks on a new phone, even if I want to move to the windows universe.
- 11-14-2012, 06:45 PM #7
- 11-14-2012, 07:34 PM #11
a) AT&T can pick off some of the competitions customers and sell new two-year contracts
b) Nokia sells more L920s
c) Customers get a good deal on a high-end Lumia's
However, none of the above has anything to do with generosity.
- 11-14-2012, 09:09 PM #12
The only thing that makes such a statement iffy is that the Lumia 820 (on AT&T) is $50, while the 822 is $100 (on Verizon).
- 11-15-2012, 12:15 AM #14
I am paying less than $60.00 a month for my plan and 4 phones a L 900 2 iphones (a 5 and 4S) and a galaxy SII Skyrocket famil text 3 3Gb data plans and my umlimited data plan.
11-15-2012, 12:22 AM #15
- 32 Posts
- 0 Post(s)
- 0 Thread(s)
Cant speak to the 920 but the 8X is 550 or 600 and the 822 is 450 or 500.
Screen quality is what I noticed. Even then, I will prefer Nokia's feature packed smartphone with a lesser screen over HTC's gorgeous display.
- 11-15-2012, 12:32 AM #16
The phone was designed from the ground-up for Windows Phone, which entails significant design and tooling costs. It has a high-end SLCD2 screen, NFC, and a host of other features.
It is not "bulky," and its "old" processor is the same one that powers the best-selling smartphone in the world, the Samsung Galaxy S III.
If it's not your cup of tea, you can pick up a cheap Android device with similar "hardware specs." Just remember that typically, you get what you pay for.
- 11-15-2012, 12:46 AM #17
Last edited by mlm1950; 11-15-2012 at 11:00 AM.
- 11-15-2012, 04:41 PM #18
However, in this case I've been told by Nokia employees that the subsidy paid by AT&T was part of the exclusivity deal. Since neither those Nokia employees nor I was at the table when the deal was made, I wouldn't be willing to guarantee its truthfulness, but I believe it is. On the other hand, the two approaches aren't mutually exclusive either, so make of it what you will. ;)
Wikipedia, generosity is the habit of giving without expecting anything in return. I don't think that applies to AT&T or any other for-profit company, particular not to multinational conglomerates like AT&T. I have no idea why you find it necessary to make that association, but you are free to misunderstand economics if you want to.
- 11-15-2012, 05:03 PM #19
I even used in a sentence for you a couple of posts up to help you understand the difference, though it would appear it was all for naught.
- 11-15-2012, 07:52 PM #20
Last edited by a5cent; 11-16-2012 at 02:57 PM.