Related
So, fairly pissed off now, and this makes no sense, but to promote Windows Mobile, Microsoft currently has a deal with T-Mobile to sell the G1 at $139 (I don't know if MS knows what they're doing...).
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsmobile/tmobile1/default.mspx
Click get the best deal, then "click here for discounts", then "Products", "Handhelds & PDAs", enter in a 3G zip code, and scroll down to G1. Apparently if you order over the phone, you can get just a 12 month contract as well.
Gary13579 said:
So, fairly pissed off now, and this makes no sense, but to promote Windows Mobile, Microsoft currently has a deal with T-Mobile to sell the G1 at $139 (I don't know if MS knows what they're doing...).
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsmobile/tmobile1/default.mspx
Click get the best deal, then "click here for discounts", then "Products", "Handhelds & PDAs", enter in a 3G zip code, and scroll down to G1. Apparently if you order over the phone, you can get just a 12 month contract as well.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That is weird...they have all three colors too.
dude, presalers like us got ripped then
Dammit... What the heck is Microsoft doing anyways? Selling an/the Android phone?
I'm fairly sure Microsoft just told T-Mobile "We'll give a discount on PDA phones we send to your site", and since all their PDA phones used to run WM it was fine. I'm sure Microsoft will fix it soon; order it while you can.
Gary13579 said:
I'm fairly sure Microsoft just told T-Mobile "We'll give a discount on PDA phones we send to your site", and since all their PDA phones used to run WM it was fine. I'm sure Microsoft will fix it soon; order it while you can.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
+1
damn im mad.. i could of saved like crazy
I wounder if that deal applies to people like me who already had a t-mobile plan (still love my dash) and had to pay $350 for the G1?
1 year contract?
After applying the phone to a family plan, I only see a set contract length of 2 years. Reading the descriptions for each category of plans, it says all plans require a 2 year contract...
am I missing something?
go through the whole process
This requires a 2 year contract. The only perk is the activation fee and the price. Walmart had the same deal a while back.
uhmmmmm read the first post...
order over the phone to get 1 yr...
its really surprising how many people on xda-developers can't comprehend common english...
What a nasty way to rip us off with their pre-orders? I don´t get what Microsoft has to do with this.
Maybe they're doing it with the belief that Android is an inferior OS and that this low price will entice enough people to buy it, then their combined bad experience will reach the critical mass required to delay the implementation of Android and the consequent dilution of their market share.
HagbardCelineII said:
Maybe they're doing it with the belief that Android is an inferior OS and that this low price will entice enough people to buy it, then their combined bad experience will reach the critical mass required to delay the implementation of Android and the consequent dilution of their market share.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
T-Mobile wouldn't let them intentionally do this. I say again, this is likely nothing more than an error on Microsofts end.
Gary13579 said:
T-Mobile wouldn't let them intentionally do this. I say again, this is likely nothing more than an error on Microsofts end.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think the error is on t-mobiles end. Since it is their website that shows the info.
http://extranet.t-mobile.com/tmobile-exc/epp/home.do
neoobs said:
I think the error is on t-mobiles end. Since it is their website that shows the info.
http://extranet.t-mobile.com/tmobile-exc/epp/home.do
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
T-Mobile will just sell phones at the price Microsoft says, because Microsoft will refund them for the discounts. And I'm sure MS is paying full MSRP on the phones, aka if T-Mobile were to sell a new phone with new contract they'd only be making $179, where as if they sell the phone for Microsoft they are making the full $399. Consumer pays less, but T-Mobile gets more.
driz said:
uhmmmmm read the first post...
order over the phone to get 1 yr...
its really surprising how many people on xda-developers can't comprehend common english...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
T-mo is supposedly no longer doing 1 year contracts through this or similar discounted plans. If you contact them they won't honor the 1 year contract that is stated on the Microsoft site. According to the 2 or 3 T-mo reps I spoke with, there was a big hub-bub about this a few months ago and they decided to no longer offer them as part of these discounted plans. Take it for what it's worth.
As to the device being cheaper through Microsoft, it's not an offer exclusive to them. T-mo offers corporate/organizational discounts to many groups. Check with your employer or search around the net for groups you're eligible for (they're not too difficult to find). They often include a discount on monthly fees in addition to the hardware discount.
bitbybit said:
As to the device being cheaper through Microsoft, it's not an offer exclusive to them. T-mo offers corporate/organizational discounts to many groups. Check with your employer or search around the net for groups you're eligible for (they're not too difficult to find). They often include a discount on monthly fees in addition to the hardware discount.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yep. I got mine for $139 in store (in stock) with no activation fee. Plus 12% off per month. I just told them my employer up front (well .. I asked for the discount, since I knew we got one).
I was surprised that they never asked for any type of proof.
This is for new LINE ONLY, meaning you will lose your existing phone number and no you cant get a new line and then port your old number to the new line and cancel the old one. There is no porting within the same carrier required by law and they wont do it for you, I tried.
I used this last year to get my WING for $50 with actually no rebate back then. While everyone was stuck with 2 year contract, I got it for 1 year contract and that is why I was eligible for the G1 at $179.
Great deal and thank Microsoft!
tried to go through the process, and it looks like you have to get their data plan if you try to do it online...
btw, how do i know if my employer qualifies for discount?
After reading all the stories, lots of comments on blogs and forums, I have had enough of the BS about how $530 is over priced and way too much and blah blah blah. You guys want the latest and greatest but aren't willing to pay any more than $5 for it.
Every single phone worth money for years has had an unsubsidized price of at least $550 with a few exceptions of course (G1 is only $400, but it is a generation old hardware). An iPhone 3GS 32gb retails for $699 straight up. The HTC HD2 is $899 on Amazon. Good phones aren't cheap as I am sure a lot of you know. So in this respect, $530 is actually a pretty good deal; especially when you compare it to the HD2 which has the same processor and similar hardware. You are getting a next-gen phone with the best screen to ever be on a phone, double the ram of most high end phones, and double the resolution of most high end phones. You expected the best of the best to be cheap? Pfft...
Also, my current T-Mobile plan is superior to what is going to be offered. It will be cheaper and easier in the long run to just buy the phone straight up.
What I am seeing from people is they see $530 and freak the hell out because they have the $180 to compare it against. Sure, there is a big difference there, but you are locked in to a contract for 2 years. $80 * 24 months + $180 = $2100 over 2 years! AND you only have 500 minutes. If you bought the phone straight up and went with Even More Plus for $80/mo, you get unlimited everything. $80 * 24 months + $530 = $2450. Yes, this is more expensive, HOWEVER, how many times will you go over your 500 minutes in the next 2 years? If this is not a problem for you, by all means, go right ahead and get the contract deal since it suits you. But for me, and I suspect most people, 500 minutes is not enough. For the additional $350 over 2 years, or $14.58 and change every month, it is worth having those unlimited minutes.
Does anybody else agree with me on this? All of my phone junkies I talk to agree that $530 is reasonable. Sure, we all would love a less expensive phone, but lets get real here...
Oh, and if this "leak" turns out to be false, than what an awesome waste of time and all of this is moot! LOL
Agree with you on this. My current plan is dirt cheep for unlimited data and no 2 year contract, so I'll shell out the $530 if that's all official after the 5th!
people are trippin over $530 for a phone like this? I paid $550 for my unlocked fuze last year, $800 for unbranded touch pro 2 in April, unlocked motorola droid(milestone) is $800! Al least this phone has some kind of US 3G support, unlike most unbranded phones that come state side. I think I'm a get it day 1, and then get the Bravo when it come out later this year if Sense UI cant be import on the Nexus.
I agree with you guys wholeheartedly. To be honest though, I think it's most telling to compare plans in an apples to apples manner. I'm a dork with a background in finance, so yes, I created a spreadsheet to calculate all the costs incrementally to see where changes in costs were coming from in my comparison.
After running through the numbers and calculating total costs over a 24 month term, for the 500 minute EM and EM+ plans, with the respective phone costs, the total cost over 24 months if I bought the phone unlocked would be $1970. If I purchased it on contract for $180, the total I'd spend over 24 months would be $2100.
There's NO WAY that you'll spend more over the long term with the EM+ plan UNLESS you're eligible for a corporate discount on the EM plan (which I happily am). With my discount, the total for the EM plan comes to $1811, but that doesn't apply to everyone.
The problem here is that most people are spoiled by the subsidized prices of phones. What they're not realizing is that they're paying for that subsidy in the form of more expensive plans...and then some, as my illustration above clearly proves. If T-mobile allows us to finance unsubsidized phones for 20 months on EM+ plans, then this works out to be more manageable for consumers. Either way, though... people need to consider total cost of ownership (TCO)... not just monthly cost and initial cash outlay for the device.
Exactly! Thanks for doing that. People just don't look for future savings and would rather have instant gratification. They are excited by a cheap up front cost and monthly service fee be damned!
I totally agree with you. it is by far the best phone in terms of specifications and price compared to its competitors (iphone 3gs, HD2).
Thanks for explaining this to people.
T-Mo Unlimited Voice/Web/Text $79.99/mo x 24 months = $1,920
Phone: $530.00
====
Total: $2,450.00
IPhone Plan
AT&T Unlimited Voice/Web/Text $149.99/mo for 24 months = $3,600
Phone: $200.00
====
Total: $3,800.00
-No contract for the T-Mobile plan
-No texts? AT&T without any text message plan still comes to $3,320
I was hoping for unlocked-only availability. It would keep certain... um... people... from buying the phone and then flooding the forums with questions, tacky themes, etc.
Dont really care about the price. It's actually not too bad, but if they only offer a 3g for Tmobile version here in the states then why bother selling it from google? Now...if they offer a few versions that can do 3g on several of the networks, or the final device gives us 3g on AT&T and Tmobile (and perhaps they do a verizon version too!)...that would be an awesome sale.
lordmaxx said:
Dont really care about the price. It's actually not too bad, but if they only offer a 3g for Tmobile version here in the states then why bother selling it from google? Now...if they offer a few versions that can do 3g on several of the networks, or the final device gives us 3g on AT&T and Tmobile (and perhaps they do a verizon version too!)...that would be an awesome sale.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I imagine that Google will be releasing high-end phones for all carriers this year. I think they started with T-mobile for a variety of possible reasons. It's not beyond the realm of possibility that they felt that T-mo should get preference because they were the first carrier to carry the Android torch to market. I also wouldn't be surprised if Google had planned this all along and that T-mobile was promised to get the first "Google phone". Obviously this is all conjecture, but it makes sense from a business perspective.
uansari1 said:
I imagine that Google will be releasing high-end phones for all carriers this year. I think they started with T-mobile for a variety of possible reasons. It's not beyond the realm of possibility that they felt that T-mo should get preference because they were the first carrier to carry the Android torch to market. I also wouldn't be surprised if Google had planned this all along and that T-mobile was promised to get the first "Google phone". Obviously this is all conjecture, but it makes sense from a business perspective.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
But the problem with getting the first of anything is it will be ancient by the time other carriers receive their Android devices
Not necessarily. Given the specs of this phone, I can't see it becoming obsolete as quickly as the G1 did. I could be wrong, but how soon would you think a phone would come out with over 1ghz processor and over 512 ram and rom?
uansari1 said:
Not necessarily. Given the specs of this phone, I can't see it becoming obsolete as quickly as the G1 did. I could be wrong, but how soon would you think a phone would come out with over 1ghz processor and over 512 ram and rom?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Aren't there already two other snapdragon devices out? What about the rumors of another iphone being released later this year?
I think the g1 may have been just as big when it came out. Times change, so does technology. The N1 may seem like the hottest new device, but it's the Nexus ONE just as the Dream was the Gee ONE. Look at where we are now. With at least half a dozen android capable devices out in about a year and 50+ rumored by 2012.
andythefan said:
Aren't there already two other snapdragon devices out? What about the rumors of another iphone being released later this year?
I think the g1 may have been just as big when it came out. Times change, so does technology. The N1 may seem like the hottest new device, but it's the Nexus ONE just as the Dream was the Gee ONE. Look at where we are now. With at least half a dozen android capable devices out in about a year and 50+ rumored by 2012.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Your points are well taken. No one's saying that this is THE ultimate phone of all time. It's simply the greatest Android phone to be released yet, and based on its specs, it seems to be a very significant advance forward in hardware as compared to other devices, aside from Droid.
uansari1 said:
Your points are well taken. No one's saying that this is THE ultimate phone of all time. It's simply the greatest Android phone to be released yet, and based on its specs, it seems to be a very significant advance forward in hardware as compared to other devices, aside from Droid.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Before the Droid all the Android devices were mostly similar (form factor, screen resolution/size, cpu, etc). This is just like the Droid. It was supposed to be the greatest Android device until the next phone showed up a few months later. How do we know a device with similar or better specs won't show up soon? HTC's leaked roadmap has a lot of impressive devices scheduled for this year.
The marketplace is only going to fragment even more Developers aren't happy coding for all these different devices.
IDK if you all are missing the point or if maybe im just redirecting it but here goes
This does not fit into how google normally does things. Correct me if im wrong but the formula usually goes
Take good service/software and make it better + dirt cheap or free+data mining = profit$$
If they aren't subsidizing any of the cost, why should we let them have our data?
esincho said:
people are trippin over $530 for a phone like this? I paid $550 for my unlocked fuze last year, $800 for unbranded touch pro 2 in April, unlocked motorola droid(milestone) is $800! Al least this phone has some kind of US 3G support, unlike most unbranded phones that come state side. I think I'm a get it day 1, and then get the Bravo when it come out later this year if Sense UI cant be import on the Nexus.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I am fully agree with your statement that at least this phone has some sort of US 3G support which many unlocked phones lacked or manufacturers are too slow to release the US 3G version (read: Nokia N95 NAM edition).
I think this angry attitude is a manifestation of our credit-driven lifestyle. Many people don't realize that paying cheaper price for a phone alongside mandatory 2 years contract (and ETFs if we decided to cancel) is more expensive. Even if they do, the fact that they can OWN the product NOW (regardless whether you can afford the whole price or not) is what makes it desirable in this part of the world.
Regarding the fact that it doesn't support AT&T 3G bands, well suck it up because iPhone didn't support T-Mobile 3G either and I'm sure there are many Tmob subscribers are interested to get that capabilities too. Until US cleared up these 3G band fragmentation (which probably won't happen), we are at the mercy of these manufacturers to step up their game and put in Quad Band UMTS as opposed to cherry picking 3 UMTS bands to be put into their phones.
Only thing making me think twice is when will a keyboard version of the hardware come out.
burton14e7 said:
Only thing making me think twice is when will a keyboard version of the hardware come out.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The keyboard phone with these specs would be the next G1, most likely to come out just in time for the early G1 adopters to renew their contracts.
uansari1 said:
I agree with you guys wholeheartedly. To be honest though, I think it's most telling to compare plans in an apples to apples manner. I'm a dork with a background in finance, so yes, I created a spreadsheet to calculate all the costs incrementally to see where changes in costs were coming from in my comparison.
After running through the numbers and calculating total costs over a 24 month term, for the 500 minute EM and EM+ plans, with the respective phone costs, the total cost over 24 months if I bought the phone unlocked would be $1970. If I purchased it on contract for $180, the total I'd spend over 24 months would be $2100.
There's NO WAY that you'll spend more over the long term with the EM+ plan UNLESS you're eligible for a corporate discount on the EM plan (which I happily am). With my discount, the total for the EM plan comes to $1811, but that doesn't apply to everyone.
The problem here is that most people are spoiled by the subsidized prices of phones. What they're not realizing is that they're paying for that subsidy in the form of more expensive plans...and then some, as my illustration above clearly proves. If T-mobile allows us to finance unsubsidized phones for 20 months on EM+ plans, then this works out to be more manageable for consumers. Either way, though... people need to consider total cost of ownership (TCO)... not just monthly cost and initial cash outlay for the device.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Expanding on this and assuming no discounts...
Option A) Buy the phone for $180 subsidized and the 500-minute plan for $80/mo, signing a contract to pay $2100 total over 24 mos.
Option B) Buy the phone for $530 unsubsidized and unlocked and choose the comparable 500-minute plus unlimited text/data Even More Plus plan for $60/mo for a total cost of $1970 over 24 mos with no contract.
So over two years of the phone and contract, you save $130 by going with option B.
But will you really last two years? Let's see what happens if you want to change phones after one year, which is entirely possible given the rate at which mobile technology is moving.
Option A) Early reports indicate a $350 early termination fee imposed by T-Mobile during the first 120 days, but no details have been learned about the fee past that window. Let's assume it reduces linearly to zero over the remaining life of the contract, meaning your fee for leaving early would be $210 at the one year mark. This puts you at $1350 to get out free and clear from the phone and contract.
Option B) You have no ETF, so you'll have paid $1250 at the end of one year.
So, even after just a year you still spend $100 less buying unsubsidized. Further, your phone will already be unlocked and unbranded, ready for quick sale on E-bay.
Pretty simple choice for me. Less money & easy to move on = no-brainer.
Heads Up: AT&T Raising ETF to $325 for Smartphones
http://phandroid.com/2010/05/21/heads-up-att-raising-etf-to-350-for-smartphones/
isnt the evo a sprint/CDMA phone?
hotwire said:
isnt the evo a sprint/CDMA phone?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
yes that is correct but wot i mean is lot of att users are leaving att n moving towards sprint
fazzy said:
yes that is correct but wot i mean is lot of att users are leaving att n moving towards sprint
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
ipreordered mine im good
fazzy said:
Heads Up: AT&T Raising ETF to $325 for Smartphones
http://phandroid.com/2010/05/21/heads-up-att-raising-etf-to-350-for-smartphones/
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Beware HTC EVO Buyers *who are leaving AT&T....
$325 ETF is only going to start from 1st June and that too only for new contracts!
Just cancel your contract on the 31st, get a Hero with Sprint, and exchange it for an EVO on the 4th. Voila!
v2tech said:
$325 ETF is only going to start from 1st June and that too only for new contracts!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That can't be emphasized enough. AT&T ETFs for customers currently on contract will remain $175 with the $5/month prorate regardless of this change. The new ETF will only apply to those customers signing up for a new contract with a smartphone on or after June 1, 2010.
this is just AT&T gearing up for the newest Iphone release...
And Verizon just raised their smartphone ETF to $350.
whats the EFT on tmobile??
xeno314 said:
That can't be emphasized enough. AT&T ETFs for customers currently on contract will remain $175 with the $5/month prorate regardless of this change. The new ETF will only apply to those customers signing up for a new contract with a smartphone on or after June 1, 2010.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
From what I know, it also applies to upgrade customers, because an upgrade is a new contract. So if you upgrade to a smartphone, your ETF rises as well. Though you have to consider... if you're willing to upgrade, what are the chances you'll cancel your contract? Not likely, I'd say. Though there are circumstances, I'll admit.
First Verizon raised their ETF, now AT&T... I guarantee T-Mobile and Sprint will follow suit soon, that's always the way things go in this industry. So I wouldn't freak out about this, people. After all, you have to consider WHY they're raising ETFs... it's because of all the people commiting fraud around this country. Hell, I just had a guy the other day want to buy an iPhone from me, and blatantly said he was going to cancel his contract and keep the phone, allowing him the phone cheaper than if he'd bought it full price. The textbook definition of fraud XD
Now that I think about it, I should've let him... since Radioshack has ownership of the device if the contract is cancelled within 90 days ;D Would've been a kick in the pants for him, getting what he deserved.
AT&T ETF
Funny you mention this Friday I found that my contract is up today, May 23. I had to get a manager because she insisted that after today, my ETF was $175.00. No, No, I completed the terms of the contract for THIS phone, now Im just paying for its usage and can walk anytime I want! If I get a new phone (now) then I will be married to AT&T for another 2-years and ETF would apply.
This brings an interesting question into the foray: would you prefer to pay the full, un-subsidized cost of a smartphone if it meant you had no contract and no ETF's? I would think that monthly fees would be lower if handsets were un-subsidized.
Or is the current state of affairs preferable: lower unit cost, but strapped to a contract and ETF's?
What say you?
khov07 said:
This brings an interesting question into the foray: would you prefer to pay the full, un-subsidized cost of a smartphone if it meant you had no contract and no ETF's? I would think that monthly fees would be lower if handsets were un-subsidized.
Or is the current state of affairs preferable: lower unit cost, but strapped to a contract and ETF's?
What say you?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I would think AT&T or T-Mobile would, they are both GSM and if you pay full price, they could care less where you take it or what you do with it . You can even sell it overseas as GSM is pretty starndard Globally.
Sprint and Verzion are CDMA. If im sprint, IMO, I would not cut on a Verzion phone, I want you to purchase one of mine, I dont care what you paid for it. and vice versa.
well the carrier companies do that just for one and only reason. People don't care what kind of service they have anymore (basically because now it's almost standar for all the carrier services. Except if you live in a area where one carrier is working) Now all they want is the meanest, badest, sickest, phone there is on the market. We see that switch of interest with iphone. Att got soooooo many new lines cause of apple. I bet if apple knew that it would have that much of success. They would've sell the phone bythemselves. To all the carriers. Anyway i believe that's my thoughts about the new ETFS. Because now they try to get the best phones on the market. And since everybody would compete on that area. They just raise it up. As far the fraud that member Xenithflare said. I believe that the same companies are fraud! As member dsims7_2000 said, they told him that he had to pay the ETF even when he was off the contract. Now if it was somebody else he would've pay it and they wouldn't say anything to him. So they are the fraud. I know that because it happent to me before ;p
khov07 said:
This brings an interesting question into the foray: would you prefer to pay the full, un-subsidized cost of a smartphone if it meant you had no contract and no ETF's? I would think that monthly fees would be lower if handsets were un-subsidized.
Or is the current state of affairs preferable: lower unit cost, but strapped to a contract and ETF's?
What say you?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
1 year contracts. like T-mo has.
chazglenn3 said:
And Verizon just raised their smartphone ETF to $350.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
dude, that was back in November.
No, David is ALOT Smarter now!!!
No, I can walk from AT&T anytime I want, free, after comversation with Management. I paid AT&T my debt for this phone. How do I know this......
I paid Sprint $130.00 when I left with Treo, assuming I would have bad credit and no one would want me although I had that phone 30 months, 6 past my contract.
crazy talk said:
dude, that was back in November.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
My bad. I am with AT&T. I read just the other day about Verizon going to $350. Didn't know it was old news.
It was a bargain at Google's online outlet. How can they have the balls to say the phone is a $699.00 retail phone? $300.00 with a new two year T-Mobile contract? This isn't going to help sales.
Here it is at i-wireless
Here it is at Pure Wireless for AT&T - no contract price of $638.00 plus shipping.
Ugh - I hope this isn't going to be a sign of what's to come.
Wow, never even thought of seeing it at those prices. I'm not sure what to make of this actually because they were talking about selling it at retail outlets, not on the internet.
This one is my favorite.
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=270562235947&ssPageName=STRK:MEWAX:IT
krabman said:
Wow, never even thought of seeing it at those prices. I'm not sure what to make of this actually because they were talking about selling it at retail outlets, not on the internet.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Those seem like 3rd party retailers, they always seem to bloat the prices so they make money off of it, if you go directly to an official store, they'll have it at the actual price. I heard t-mobile is going to start selling it officially.
Edit:
http://www.pcworld.com/article/186991/nexus_one_price_drops_for_some_tmobile_upgrades.html
New customers get it for $180, upgrades are another story.
ChillRays said:
This one is my favorite.
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=270562235947&ssPageName=STRK:MEWAX:IT
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That one kills me. I didn't know Hong Kong was in Canada.
prophetjinn said:
Those seem like 3rd party retailers, they always seem to bloat the prices so they make money off of it, if you go directly to an official store, they'll have it at the actual price. I heard t-mobile is going to start selling it officially.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I heard that too. I heard AT&T will, too. But I have serious doubts about that rumor. If they do, they'll insist on screwing it up. You can count on no more "fastboot oem unlock"
attn1 said:
That one kills me. I didn't know Hong Kong was in Canada.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
haha i just noticed that too...
prophetjinn said:
Those seem like 3rd party retailers, they always seem to bloat the prices so they make money off of it, if you go directly to an official store, they'll have it at the actual price. I heard t-mobile is going to start selling it officially.
Edit:
http://www.pcworld.com/article/186991/nexus_one_price_drops_for_some_tmobile_upgrades.html
New customers get it for $180, upgrades are another story.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
NOUN
1. sale to consumers: the selling of goods directly to customers, e.g. in stores
"She works in retail."
ADVERB
1. not wholesale: from an ordinary store or at the regular customer price and in small amounts rather than in bulk
"I bought it retail."
This is something that maybe has a different connotation elsewhere but retail around here refers to brick and mortar. Before there was an internet something not bought at retail or catalog sales from a retailer was either mail order or private sale. Nowdays you can add internet sales to that as a different venue to shop but it is not retail.
edit... Maybe its just because I'm old. Let me rephrase, its not retail to me or basically anyone I know. I'm going to have to ask one of my kids the next time they come over.
This is what I've been saying all along. It's not carriers they mentioned, they said third party retail, like amazon, best buy, frys electronics, etc. I mean what carriers are left? They all passed on the nexus, so the only places left are stores.
krabman said:
NOUN
1. sale to consumers: the selling of goods directly to customers, e.g. in stores
"She works in retail."
ADVERB
1. not wholesale: from an ordinary store or at the regular customer price and in small amounts rather than in bulk
"I bought it retail."
This is something that maybe has a different connotation elsewhere but retail around here refers to brick and mortar. Before there was an internet something not bought at retail or catalog sales from a retailer was either mail order or private sale. Nowdays you can add internet sales to that as a different venue to shop but it is not retail.
edit... Maybe its just because I'm old. Let me rephrase, its not retail to me or basically anyone I know. I'm going to have to ask one of my kids the next time they come over.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Did I say retail? I asked if this is a sign of things to come because NO ONE has yet announced the Nexus One is slated for their retail outlet. Also, the AT&T version is "temporarily unavailable" from the Google online store.
If sales are so damn bad, how did this happen?
attn1 said:
Did I say retail? I asked if this is a sign of things to come because NO ONE has yet announced the Nexus One is slated for their retail outlet. Also, the AT&T version is "temporarily unavailable" from the Google online store.
If sales are so damn bad, how did this happen?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Its going to take 3 days to get more AT&T Nexus Ones in. A google employee confirmed this. Sadly I don't have a link to back this up but thats the word going around. =)
ChillRays said:
Its going to take 3 days to get more AT&T Nexus Ones in. A google employee confirmed this. Sadly I don't have a link to back this up but thats the word going around. =)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
And this happened because they are letting inventory drop before allowing a retailer to take over? A $99.00 AT&T Nexus at Walmart would be outstanding. With my luck, it will end up at Radio Shack for $429.00 with a new contract. My wife now wants one.
attn1 said:
And this happened because they are letting inventory drop before allowing a retailer to take over? A $99.00 AT&T Nexus at Walmart would be outstanding. With my luck, it will end up at Radio Shack for $429.00 with a new contract. My wife now wants one.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Looks like your wife and I are in the same boat I really can't wait for my N1.
ChillRays said:
Looks like your wife and I are in the same boat I really can't wait for my N1.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well, we're waiting a few days for the new iphone to come out. If I peddle that on Ebay new and unopened and contract free, it ought to bring enough profit to pay for a good part of a new N1. I just hope it's available for a reasonable price somewhere when we're ready to buy.
attn1 said:
Did I say retail? I asked if this is a sign of things to come because NO ONE has yet announced the Nexus One is slated for their retail outlet. Also, the AT&T version is "temporarily unavailable" from the Google online store.
If sales are so damn bad, how did this happen?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
They said retail in their announcement. You know, it turns out people want to get their hands on them, or whatever the language was. I dont feel like looking it up but I'm sure you recall that. That is why I wonder exactly what this is all about. This isnt going to move many more handsets than their own direct sales. Thats where I was going about it not making sense. It doesnt jive with what they said.
FYI, I Wireless is a cell phone provider based out of Iowa, and is affiliated with T-Mobile USA, although both are still separate companies. They have had the Nexus One since the end of March at select corporate locations. The reason they are priced that much is because they had to buy them 5 at a time from Google in order to offer them to customers. They did this because they wanted to offer their customers the Nexus One, and this was the only way they could at a discount.
With the change in Google policy, they are now available at every location in the company. But here is the thing, Google is still selling the phone to retailers and carriers, and they are charging an arm and a leg for each unit. $300 on contract is still a large discount from what the whole sale price of the phone is for most retailers... some retailers and carriers, ie T-Mobile, are getting a better deal, thus can offer a lower price. But they are also taking a bigger hit than others are (they can afford to because they have a larger customer base, thus if they only make $20 over a 2 year contract off a Nexus One owner, they can handle that because they have so many customers it still adds up to millions in the end).
krabman said:
They said retail in their announcement. You know, it turns out people want to get their hands on them, or whatever the language was. I dont feel like looking it up but I'm sure you recall that. That is why I wonder exactly what this is all about. This isnt going to move many more handsets than their own direct sales. Thats where I was going about it not making sense. It doesnt jive with what they said.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yup, agreed.
pjcforpres said:
FYI, I Wireless is a cell phone provider based out of Iowa, and is affiliated with T-Mobile USA, although both are still separate companies. They have had the Nexus One since the end of March at select corporate locations. The reason they are priced that much is because they had to buy them 5 at a time from Google in order to offer them to customers. They did this because they wanted to offer their customers the Nexus One, and this was the only way they could at a discount.
With the change in Google policy, they are now available at every location in the company. But here is the thing, Google is still selling the phone to retailers and carriers, and they are charging an arm and a leg for each unit. $300 on contract is still a large discount from what the whole sale price of the phone is for most retailers... some retailers and carriers, ie T-Mobile, are getting a better deal, thus can offer a lower price. But they are also taking a bigger hit than others are (they can afford to because they have a larger customer base, thus if they only make $20 over a 2 year contract off a Nexus One owner, they can handle that because they have so many customers it still adds up to millions in the end).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well, $529.00 retail/no contract is not an arm and a leg. The price should drop in half or more with a new 2 year contract - the plans have fat in the price to provide a hefty $300.00 or more sudsidy. AT&T just increased their early termination contract penalty to $325.00 on smart phones to make sure they recover their subsidy. Something is just not right with this picture.
Man, Google is dumb here.
Why does it have to be online-only or store-only?
What they should have done is send one or two phones to all T-Mobile stores, and maybe have an online kiosk too. Then people can check it out in person and BOOM, sold.
It doesn't have to be one or the other.
attn1 said:
Well, $529.00 retail/no contract is not an arm and a leg. The price should drop in half or more with a new 2 year contract - the plans have fat in the price to provide a hefty $300.00 or more sudsidy. AT&T just increased their early termination contract penalty to $325.00 on smart phones to make sure they recover their subsidy. Something is just not right with this picture.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I Wireless doesn't charge $325, though. And like I already said, they were buying them 5 at a time at full retail price just to offer them to their customers. That is a $260 subsidy... but that in perspective, if you gave that discount on a BB Bold 9700, the phone would be about $50. In general, most phones are subsidized about $100 for a dumb phone and $200 for a smartphone. And net the carrier about $50-$100 in total profit over a 2 year contract. Verizon and AT&T make much more than the T-Mobile's, and especially I Wireless of the world.
pjcforpres said:
I Wireless doesn't charge $325, though. And like I already said, they were buying them 5 at a time at full retail price just to offer them to their customers. That is a $260 subsidy... but that in perspective, if you gave that discount on a BB Bold 9700, the phone would be about $50. In general, most phones are subsidized about $100 for a dumb phone and $200 for a smartphone. And net the carrier about $50-$100 in total profit over a 2 year contract. Verizon and AT&T make much more than the T-Mobile's, and especially I Wireless of the world.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
How was Google pushing them out to new T-Mo customers for $179.00?
Paul22000 said:
Man, Google is dumb here.
Why does it have to be online-only or store-only?
What they should have done is send one or two phones to all T-Mobile stores, and maybe have an online kiosk too. Then people can check it out in person and BOOM, sold.
It doesn't have to be one or the other.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah, they could have done something different, that's for sure. Walmart? Best Buy? These guys can buy in enough volume to put them out there are a reasonable price.
Does anybody know where I could possibly buy this awesome phone without a contract? Ebay is the obvious answer but I was hoping for an etailer where I could put in a preorder.
Thanks.
Sprint will sell it without contract. $500. Reserve a copy.
You *might* have a problem with a representative not wanting to sell it to you off contract because they will miss out on the commission. If that happens just tell them it is a gift for a Sprint Customer(Your mom or whoever).
Pops_G said:
Sprint will sell it without contract. $500. Reserve a copy.
You *might* have a problem with a representative not wanting to sell it to you off contract because they will miss out on the commission. If that happens just tell them it is a gift for a Sprint Customer(Your mom or whoever).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is why I saved a copy of the pre-order page saying that I can reserve and pay $500 off contract.
im switching to sprint from t-mobile for this phone, or probably just keeping both since i want to keep my nexus active, but is there any incentive for me to buy off contract if i am a new customer?
Awesome. For some reason I didn't think Sprint did. Thanks guys.
ImSoHungry said:
im switching to sprint from t-mobile for this phone, or probably just keeping both since i want to keep my nexus active, but is there any incentive for me to buy off contract if i am a new customer?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You can't. You have to get a contract with a new account.
TheBiles said:
You can't. You have to get a contract with a new account.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
10-4
ill get the 450 plan, with my military discount, including the stupid $10/4g cost, will only be 78.85/month
TheBiles said:
This is why I saved a copy of the pre-order page saying that I can reserve and pay $500 off contract.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Could you show me where exactly it says this? I'm not seeing it. All I see mentioning the retail price is, "If you're not eligible for an upgrade, you'll need to pay full retail price, $499.99."
I'd like to save a copy to take with me on pickup day too. =)
Poryhack said:
Could you show me where exactly it says this? I'm not seeing it. All I see mentioning the retail price is, "If you're not eligible for an upgrade, you'll need to pay full retail price, $499.99."
I'd like to save a copy to take with me on pickup day too. =)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That is the part. Not eligible for an upgrade is off-contract.
TheBiles said:
That is the part. Not eligible for an upgrade is off-contract.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ah. I thought that might mean something along the lines of "You can use your current contract but we're not gonna give you this phone at a subsidized price."
Poryhack said:
Ah. I thought that might mean something along the lines of "You can use your current contract but we're not gonna give you this phone at a subsidized price."
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
$500 is the unsubsidized price, so no worries.
Just letting you know, Sprint has put out orders to NOT sell this as a cold handset, you HAVE to activate the phone if you're buying it in store, even if you pay full retail. They want subscribers, not to take a loss on the handsets for no return.
So you're saying that I can't, as a current sprint subscriber, unbox MY phone at MY discretion?? The last thing I want is some monkey behind the desk unboxing my $500 device and leaving fingerprints all over it just because it needed to be activated before I left the store. This happened with my Evo and bothered the heck out of me; although I understand in that case as I was a new subscriber having a number ported over AND purchasing the device at a subsidized price (should still be able to activate the phone at my leisure but whatever). However, I should be able to purchase the device at "full" price, take it home, unbox it myself, and activate it through the established means since I'm already under contract and past my 30 trial period. They will be getting paid either way.
P.S. Unless activation refers to line activation, as opposed to phone activation. Big difference.
P.S.S. Is sprint's "subsidized off-contract" price of $499.99 (compared to $549.99 at, say, RS) only for new subscribers and/or upgraders? In any case, that "no cold handset" policy is about as clear as mud to me right now.
entropism said:
Just letting you know, Sprint has put out orders to NOT sell this as a cold handset, you HAVE to activate the phone if you're buying it in store, even if you pay full retail. They want subscribers, not to take a loss on the handsets for no return.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sounds like I'm back to my original question then. If I can't buy this without a contract from Sprint who can I buy from?
On an unrelated note, why would the price the unsubsidized version so that they are losing money on the hardware?
Poryhack said:
Sounds like I'm back to my original question then. If I can't buy this without a contract from Sprint who can I buy from?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Unless a phone is factory unlocked or unlockable I don't see what the benefit of doing this would be. To my knowledge you can buy the phone from vendors like Best Buy without needing to activate the phone and just have it shipped to your house. Just be ready to shell out $649.00.
On an unrelated note, why would the price the unsubsidized version so that they are losing money on the hardware?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The low price is there to entice people who don't want to renew a contract to buy it from them as opposed to another vendor. This in conjunction with the "no cold phone sold" policy allows them to ensure that every Epic sold by them will either retain a current subscriber or add a new one so they will be making that money back. You can have a cold unactivated phone mailed to your house by another vendor but you will be spending more than $499 and won't have the added convenience of optionally having the purchase billed to your account.
According to RS, Samsung's SRP is $699.99.
TheBiles said:
That is the part. Not eligible for an upgrade is off-contract.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is incorrect. You will still be required to have a contract, you just won't be required to renew it.
nismology said:
This is incorrect. You will still be required to have a contract, you just won't be required to renew it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What about a new customer who just wants to pay full price for the phone, pick a plan and pay month-to-month? Are you saying this is not possible? He would have to make a two-year commitment even with an unsubsidized phone? That makes no sense.
boomerbubba said:
What about a new customer who just wants to pay full price for the phone, pick a plan and pay month-to-month? Are you saying this is not possible? He would have to make a two-year commitment even with an unsubsidized phone? That makes no sense.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I was speaking in terms of existing sprint customer, so my bad. That's a very good question and I'm not sure. But even the unsubsidized price isn't really unsubsidized. $699.99 is the SRP so even at the $499.99 price point they are taking a loss. From all indications, the $499.99 price point is for existing customers under contract that are not eligible for an upgrade. It wouldn't make sense for Sprint to take a loss on a phone knowing that they didn't have that customer locked into a contract to recoup the money. With that said, the only way I would see sprint allowing new subscribers to enter into a month-by-month agreement would be if they either sold phones at their cost or significantly increased the monthly service rates and I haven't seen that, personally.
boomerbubba said:
What about a new customer who just wants to pay full price for the phone, pick a plan and pay month-to-month? Are you saying this is not possible? He would have to make a two-year commitment even with an unsubsidized phone? That makes no sense.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You can't pay "month-to-month" on Sprint. If you open a new line, you must sign a new 2-year contract. I believe every carrier except for T-Mobile does this.
So if I am an existing sprint customer and I wanted to buy this phone at full price and give it as a gift to another sprint customer I won't be able to because I can't leave the store without activating it?
Sent from my HTC Hero CDMA using Tapatalk