I don't understand

[Bluesman2008]

the rational behind making people wait two years to upgreade into a new phone. It makes absolutely no sense to me. Wouldn't these carriers be making much more money from people who want the latest and greatest now instead of having to wait? I'm sure there are good reasons for it but I sure don't get it.

[vatothe0]

You can upgrade at any time. Carriers only $300+ discounts every two years.

But a compatible phone at market price and activate it any time you want.

[Bluesman2008]

Some of the new phones are over $600. Why would I pay that?

[acejavelin]

This is Business Economics 101 (OK, maybe 121)... the money Verizon (and other carriers) make is NOT on handsets, they don't make a thing and actually LOSE money when you buy that $49 Razr or $149 SGS3, they see that as an investment to keep you in a contract, their real money maker is the recurring monthly revenue... handsets are subsidized (ie. they pay for some or all of the retail cost) because you renew your contract and agree to pay them for additional two years of service. Basically they are saying "yeah, we will throw you a $300 bone, but you can pay us $100/month ($2400) for the next two years for it." Good for them because they get guaranteed recurring monthly revenue, good for you because you don't have to shell out $400 to $600 for a device all at once. If they did it every 6 months, then it just wouldn't be worth it. Some carriers used to do one year contracts, but the price you paid for the devices were double to triple the two year price, and few people took that route and most carriers dropped it as an option.

Verizon and other carrier will gladly let you upgrade at anytime, as long as YOU will pay the full retail price of the device.

Although another way of looking at is your monthly service only really costs $50 or $60 a month for everything, the rest is paying back VZW for the device plus interest... Want the same thing without subsidizes already? Go Prepaid with a high-end unlocked GSM phone, just pop in a SIM for the carrier of your choice and pay the monthly fee. Same thing, but which do you prefer? Verizon, AT&T, and T-Mobile prefer to lock you in to a contract... simple as that.

Wouldn't these carriers be making much more money from people who want the latest and greatest now instead of having to wait?

How would carriers make more money this way? Knowing now what I just said... Seriously, If you have an good idea, please let me know, I will talk to my investors immediately!!!

[vatothe0]

Some of the new phones are over $600. Why would I pay that?

So you can have the latest and greatest now, instead of having to wait.

[HowardZ]

The way I see it, half of your cell phone bill is paying for your discounted phone ever two years.

I'd prefer Verizon to cut my bill in half and not subsidize phone prices.

I'd like it even better if Verizon will completely get out of the phone selling business and android update business. I'd prefer to buy my phones directly from the manufacturer and get android updates directly from the manufacturer.

If I want a new phone ever year, I'll pay for it. If I want a phone ever six years, then I'll pay for it. It will be up to me.

[Abe21599]

The way I see it, half of your cell phone bill is paying for your discounted phone ever two years.

I'd prefer Verizon to cut my bill in half and not subsidize phone prices.

Tmobile does this. lower monthly but no discounts on phones.

[TWC42]

Tmobile does this. lower monthly but no discounts on phones.

And I hope they are successful. Not that I would ever consider T-Mo, but it may force others to follow suit. And if folks had to buy phones outright, it may actually lower the retail price of the phones. More people would hang on to their current phones a bit longer, lower demand, lower prices. And the carriers wouldn't have to recover the subsidy in their plan prices.

[MrSmith317]

And I hope they are successful. Not that I would ever consider T-Mo, but it may force others to follow suit. And if folks had to buy phones outright, it may actually lower the retail price of the phones. More people would hang on to their current phones a bit longer, lower demand, lower prices. And the carriers wouldn't have to recover the subsidy in their plan prices.

T-Mo has been doing this for years. Verizon and AT&T don't care about their customers. They care about the $$$$. Why else would they acknowledge that tethering is using your data your way on non-unlimited data plans? Why else would they have done away with 1 year contracts and 1 year upgrades? Why else would they have done away with new every 2? I've personally just said screw it. I'll stick with Big Red until they steal my unlimited. Once they do, I'm gone.

[mountainbikermark]

Not taking their sides but all that coverage vs all those dead spots with tmob comes to mind. Cells don't just fall from the sky and aren't maintained by pixy dust.
Personally I'd rather see stores that look like a flea market than Taj Mahal and have coverage. I'd love to see Verizon and ATT save some dough there and pass it on to the customer and cut out some of their advertising budget and pass it along as well. Who, seriously, gives a rip that Verizon is the official carrier of the nfl?

Support Our Troops!!!
<><
A Rezound phone was used for this Tapatalk post