What is it with carriers and contracts?

[rockstarzzz]

Wow! USA has got some really different contract systems that I might so struggle to understand when I move to Washington next summer!

As some of you pointed out, I am indeed from Europe. UK, precisely. The way contracts are laid out here, I think I find it too restrictive. Most networks run on 3G so the coverage pretty much stays the same. What differs is their internet speed.

I'm on Three, UK - pay ?15 a month up front and get real good 3G speeds. Got my Titan a year back for ?440. We also have networks that do unlimited everything for about ?20 on a contract if you've been with them long enough.

I've always been on pay as you go mainly because it works out *nearly* same at the end of 2-3 years contract. Also, some carriers need their phone to run their SIM! So that kills an option to just buy an unlocked phone of choice mid-contract and use it on your favoured network.

However, what I do like is the fact that you add "add lines" to your current contract for some cheaper plan, right?

Technically I could have a WP7, then add WP7.5 device, then WP8 and then WP8.5 device - all in the time of 2 years contract and still have 4 devices at 1/3 price - is that correct understanding?

 

[metalchick719]

I'm with T-Mobile and have been since early 2002, when they were still VoiceStream. They've always had the lowest prices of the major carriers here in the States, and I had a great plan that was perfect for me, including price-wise ($41 per month). My monthly bill is now higher ($54) because I had to buy a data plan with the new phone I had no choice but to buy nearly 2 years ago when I lost my old phone (both phones were Nokias, by the way). I'm still paying less than everyone I know who's on any of the other major carriers, so I really can't complain. Technically, I could switch to AT&T in January and get the Lumia 920 on contract, but I won't do that. I've had it good with T-Mobile overall and only had 2 issues with them in the past 10 3/4 years. So long as I have the money, I find it more worthwhile to get a new phone unlocked at full price (which I did in the summer of last year, when I got an iPhone 4) and then use it on T-Mobile. Hey, if I get the money, I'll get a Lumia 920 and use on my carrier - it's a guarantee I'll spend less than all the AT&T customers.

Also, I've heard really bad things about AT&T and Sprint from people I know. I know AT&T customers who complain that customer service sucks, they get their data throttled, etc. I have a friend who's on Sprint who literally gets NO service in his room at his house. Ridiculous. As for Verizon, they have excellent service, but I refuse to pay their high prices. So, again, I'm sticking with T-Mobile. I would probably consider Straight Talk if I were to go prepaid/contract free, though.

 

[Vallos]

All that probably means is that you are off your contract. As in, you have now exceeded the contract time frame. Which is exactly the same thing in AT&T. I have gone past my 2 years, so I am no longer on a contract.

I am currently in my fifth month of service.

And your contract is for Cablevision service, not the individual land line service. Which still means you are, or at least were, under contract with Cablevision. Their "$90 a month *For the first year* is a contract.

Is this "contract" the same as carrier contracts? No. The bane of carrier contract is that you have to pay to get out of it. This is not what I have with Cablevision. I can switch providers at any time without any fees imposed. What I am in is a locked discount for a year, after which, my services will go to their normal pricing. Regardless, Cablevision confirmed that I am not under contract. Period.

 

[rockstarzzz]

I am currently in my fifth month of service.


Is this "contract" the same as carrier contracts? No. The bane of carrier contract is that you have to pay to get out of it. This is not what I have with Cablevision. I can switch providers at any time without any fees imposed. What I am in is a locked discount for a year, after which, my services will go to their normal pricing. Regardless, Cablevision confirmed that I am not under contract. Period.

So you don't have to pay to terminate a contract and go to some other carrier?

 

[Vallos]

So you don't have to pay to terminate a contract and go to some other carrier?

Not for services (Internet/TV/Phone) from Cablevision. No. Like they told me, I am not under contract. Wireless carriers have you sign contracts if you want a subsidized phone. With them, you have to pay if you want to terminate your contract.

 

[SnailUK]

The main reason people pay for contracts, is they can't afford to shell out $500 on a mobile.

As such, maybe Microsoft and/or the OEMs should offer low cost credit on all WP8 devices.

So everyone has the option of buying a SIM free, carrier unlocked WP8 device, it means we can all move between carriers easily, and we are no longer held back by carriers not offering updates.

Strikes me as a win win.

 

[Vallos]

I agree. OEM's need to lower the cost of these phones. It's amazing that they are priced comparatively like a computer. But will carriers agree to this? I think they are afraid of you leaving at any time hence, the contracts.

 

[VagrantWade]

I am currently in my fifth month of service.


Is this "contract" the same as carrier contracts? No. The bane of carrier contract is that you have to pay to get out of it. This is not what I have with Cablevision. I can switch providers at any time without any fees imposed. What I am in is a locked discount for a year, after which, my services will go to their normal pricing. Regardless, Cablevision confirmed that I am not under contract. Period.

*EDIT* Actually it looks like you are right in that you don't have to sign a locked in contract for Cablevision.

But either way, it's only one small area of the U.S. so it's pretty irrelevant to the rest of the country.

 

[palandri]

The main reason people pay for contracts, is they can't afford to shell out $500 on a mobile.

As such, maybe Microsoft and/or the OEMs should offer low cost credit on all WP8 devices.

So everyone has the option of buying a SIM free, carrier unlocked WP8 device, it means we can all move between carriers easily, and we are no longer held back by carriers not offering updates.

Strikes me as a win win.

While I agree 100% with your statement, The major U.S. Wireless Carriers don't want unbranded/unlocked phones in the U.S. Marketplace. They want people to have a branded phone locked into their network on a contract. It's just how it is here. That's the business model here.

The only other thing people can do here is sign up with a MNVO.

 

[Winterfang]

I agree. OEM's need to lower the cost of these phones. It's amazing that they are priced comparatively like a computer. But will carriers agree to this? I think they are afraid of you leaving at any time hence, the contracts.

Who is the girl on your avatar? She looks familiar somehow.

 

[Vallos]

Who is the girl on your avatar? She looks familiar somehow.

This bust is based on a painting from Luis Royo, who based it on a model who I have no clue what her name is.

 

[Vallos]

*EDIT* Actually it looks like you are right in that you don't have to sign a locked in contract for Cablevision.

But either way, it's only one small area of the U.S. so it's pretty irrelevant to the rest of the country.

In that case, that really sucks.

*Edit* other forum members are now corroborating that this is not restricted to my area.

 

[Winterfang]

This bust is based on a painting from Luis Royo, who based it on a model who I have no clue what her name is.

Click to view quoted image

Looks different on the bust. Thanks.

 

[Heron_Kusanagi]

This question is so obvious with answers but is bugging me since this morning. I had to ask you guys.


I am presuming you LOVE what WP8 has to offer. Each of us already has a favourite brand and colour in mind.

Then I see posts by so many members cursing the carriers for not stocking XYZ phone or in ABC colour.

I'm on pay as you go phone. I change my phone when I want to. Never done contracts, but I understand if you are on the verge of your upgrade it means you are about to finish you contract anyway, right? So if your carrier doesn't stock your phone, why wouldn't you move to a new carrier?

Do you choose carrier i.e. network over phone? - I surely don't. Of course won't go to a 2G network if I can get 4G with different shade of Lumia 920, but if your carrier just doesn't stock coloured Lumias, would you not consider a carrier switch?

It's not as bad in Singapore where I lived as they didn't exclude phones all that much and I am on the biggest carrier here. Coverage isn't bad either and every player uses the same band. It comes down to the services and benefits you can get from the different carriers that matter.

I think users overseas are legitimately concerned about coverage though. Some carriers are just stronger in certain places and in this case a trade off has to be made. Not to mention the customer services of different companies and their own personal experiences. I have seen enough jokes and complaints about AT&T to know how bad things got in some places.

So it's really a matter of preference.

 

[1jaxstate1]

Isn't selling unbranded and unlocked phones is what got Nokia pretty much booted out the US market to begin with.

 

[aubreyq]

Isn't selling unbranded and unlocked phones is what got Nokia pretty much booted out the US market to begin with.

ABSOLUTELY.

On the topic of contracts, I've been with AT&T since the Cingular days as well. If I'm staying with the same carrier, might as well buy a subsidized phone. If I got a discount on the plan for bringing an unlocked device, then I would probably do that. I think only T-Mobile gives you a cheaper plan if you bring your own device.

On the topic of CATV/Internet/Landline phones, I am with Verizon WITHOUT a contract. I had a limited discounted price, but I could've discontinued all my services without penalties. That was made clear to me from the beginning.

 

[palandri]

Isn't selling unbranded and unlocked phones is what got Nokia pretty much booted out the US market to begin with.

I am sure that was one of the reasons, plus they had some big argument/disagreement with the CDMA chip maker, and CDMA carriers were growing in the U.S. They also started opening their own Nokia stores in major cities selling directly to the customer instead of through the carrier. We had a Nokia store on Michigan avenue in Chicago until 2009 I believe. I bought my Nokia N8 there.

I am sure there are multiple reasons.

 

[brmiller1976]

Contracts are a nasty symptom of the current mobile oligopoly. Most people who get a "free" phone don't realize that the extra cost of service added in to cover the phone costs means they're paying 2 or even 3 times as much as they'd pay if they bought the phone outright.

Cell service is a commodity. Alas, we don't get to treat it that way in large swathes of the USA.

 

[Daniel Ratcliffe]

Contracts are a nasty symptom of the current mobile oligopoly. Most people who get a "free" phone don't realize that the extra cost of service added in to cover the phone costs means they're paying 2 or even 3 times as much as they'd pay if they bought the phone outright.

Cell service is a commodity. Alas, we don't get to treat it that way in large swathes of the USA.

I dunno. Galaxy S3 for example, using Three in the UK.

For a start, here is what The One Plan offers, as well as how much it costs when taken out SIM-only.
The One Plan on Three

?029 Upfront Cost + ?31/mth for The One Plan (with phone included)
Samsung Galaxy S III on Three

?499 Upfront Cost + ?25/mth for The One Plan (SIM-Only)
Samsung Galaxy S III on Three

The use of The One Plan on both is KEY. It means you get the exact same allowance (minutes/sms/data) on BOTH.

By my math, working between the upfront costs plus the DIFFERENCE between the two contract plans.

?29 + (?6x24) = ?29 + ?144 = effectively paying ?173 for the Galaxy S3. Vs ?499 outright.

Damn... maybe I should get my Lumia 920 on contract if Three get it...

 

[wolf1891]

*EDIT* Actually it looks like you are right in that you don't have to sign a locked in contract for Cablevision.

But either way, it's only one small area of the U.S. so it's pretty irrelevant to the rest of the country.

no, it is not JUST in Vallos's area of the US that things work that way. It's pretty much the same all across the US. Cellular contracts give you a discounted phone but lock you in for a set term with an ETF if you wish to leave early. Cable and landline phone service contracts do NOT generally require you to be locked in for a span of time with an ETF as the penalty for leaving early (note: if you have your cell, cable, and landline all bundled together into one contract with certain providers, THEN it can be the case that you will sometimes be locked into the services you have for a set span of time but, this is the exception and you do not have to go that route).