Comments on: More iPhone Financial Wrinkles

By: Zealot

Zealot — Fri, 13 Jun 2008 08:32:35 +0000

They have mentioned a no contract price.

AT&T has already stated there will not be one, under any circumstances.

By: Raphael Salgado

Raphael Salgado — Fri, 13 Jun 2008 06:28:13 +0000

What I’m concerned about, not like this isn’t bound to happen to somebody… What if someone legitimately buys an iPhone 3G for $199 (or $299), starts or renews his contract for two years, then loses it in the ocean or simply gets it totally broken from falling off a building or something just after a week? Will he say, “oh well, it’s just $199 and not $599 anymore, let me run into the store and just get another one.” and will he get penalized for it? There’s no mention of a subsidy or no-contract price…

By: doogald

doogald — Fri, 13 Jun 2008 02:03:38 +0000

I’m wondering if this “penalty” that they are talking about is merely the AT&T subsidy. In other words, you can buy the iPhone for $199 – a subsidized price, assuming that you are going to activate a 2 year AT&T contract – but if you choose not to activate a contract, you lose the subsidy.

Seems to make sense to me, and suggests that there will be a way to get a phone unsubsidized.

But, I suppose I should not speculate and just wait a few weeks to get the real scoop . . .

By: bigds63

bigds63 — Thu, 12 Jun 2008 16:31:07 +0000

Um, My “old” iPhone is shaping up to be even better than the new. Sounds like the new iphone is going to be hard and expensive to hack. I for one do not have the 3G service in my area and do not need GPS at all. I don’t think a person should be driving if they are depending on a computer to tell them where to turn, I mean come on. So other than that there is not many features over the old iphone, and it actually cost more after you figure in the phone plan. Guess I will be sticking with my old “Silver Back” iPhone and not the new “Black Plastic Back” one.

By: Zealot

Zealot — Thu, 12 Jun 2008 16:18:09 +0000

Very good point, and looked at that way it is somewhat like comparing apples and oranges. On top of your comments, the analogy is also flawed due to the fact that with MS software, the activation clock only starts when the software is installed. You can keep the shrinkwrapped CDs under your bed for months, you still get the same 30 days after install to activate.

With the iPhone from the moment it is in your hand you only have so long before you need to start paying AT&T, one way or another.

By: Kevin C. Tofel

Kevin C. Tofel — Thu, 12 Jun 2008 15:56:34 +0000

Gotcha. Thanks for the explanation. Conceptually I get what you’re saying now, but in reality, I’m not sure it applies. Windows Activation is meant to thwart software piracy. If I buy the software out of pocket, why wouldn’t I activate it and if I don’t, I don’t have any additional expense. If I buy the iPhone out of pocket but don’t activate it, I *DO* have to pay an additional expense. Not quite the same because these are two different product markets, but again, I see what you meant. ;)

By: Zealot

Zealot — Thu, 12 Jun 2008 15:46:45 +0000

By a page from Microsoft’s playbook, I mean a time requirement attached to activation, as they pioneered with Windows.

By: Michael Anderson

Michael Anderson — Thu, 12 Jun 2008 15:41:09 +0000

To an extent I can understand it – they are doing a sort of ‘razor & blades’ deal with the phone to increase market share, but AT&T is taking the hit so they want to make sure they recoup.

I don’t see, however, why they don’t just sell it unlocked for ~$500 … but then I suppose subscriber numbers is as important as the $$.

By: Kevin C. Tofel

Kevin C. Tofel — Thu, 12 Jun 2008 15:35:31 +0000

I don’t understand the “page from the Microsoft playbook” reference. Can you elaborate? Thanks!