Contracts. Why?

If the cellular companies provided the service and support that their
customers desire and deserve, they would NOT need to lock us in with long,
expensive contracts. Why do we tolerate it?

Discuss...

nobody@nobody1.com1 (LHA) wrote in
news:zCsgj.3377$El5.2810@newssvr22.news.prodigy.ne t:

> If the cellular companies provided the service and support that
> their customers desire and deserve, they would NOT need to lock us
> in with long, expensive contracts. Why do we tolerate it?

When you initially contract with a provider, they usually provide a
phone at no or reduced cost. Similarly, if you renew your contract, you
can usually get a new phone at no or reduced cost.

With no contract, you'd be expected to bring your own phone or pay the
retail price.

--
Bert Hyman | St. Paul, MN | bert@iphouse.com

LHA wrote:
> If the cellular companies provided the service and support that their
> customers desire and deserve, they would NOT need to lock us in with long,
> expensive contracts. Why do we tolerate it?
>
> Discuss...
>


Huh? I've been month to month for more than eight years.

News wrote:
>
>
> LHA wrote:
>
>> If the cellular companies provided the service and support that their
>> customers desire and deserve, they would NOT need to lock us in with
>> long, expensive contracts. Why do we tolerate it?
>>
>> Discuss...
>>
>
>
> Huh? I've been month to month for more than eight years.

Yeah, but sooner or later you need a new phone. . . .

"Richard B. Gilbert" <rgilbert88@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:47826BC4.6030500@comcast.net...
> News wrote:
>>
>>
>> LHA wrote:
>>
>>> If the cellular companies provided the service and support that their
>>> customers desire and deserve, they would NOT need to lock us in with
>>> long, expensive contracts. Why do we tolerate it?
>>>
>>> Discuss...
>>>
>>
>>
>> Huh? I've been month to month for more than eight years.
>
> Yeah, but sooner or later you need a new phone. . . .
>
....and he'll jump on Ebay, pick up a nice used one (or buy 2 or 3 so he has
a backup) and he's good to go. Been doing that for years.....and saved a
ton.

On 2008-01-07, LHA <nobody@nobody1.com1> wrote:

> If the cellular companies provided the service and support
> that their customers desire and deserve, they would NOT need
> to lock us in with long, expensive contracts.

As long as they're giving you a $200-$300 phone for free,
they're going to require that you guarantee future purchases in
order to cover the cost of that phone.

> Why do we tolerate it?

People tolerate it because they want a "free" phone.

--
Grant Edwards grante Yow! UH-OH!! We're out
at of AUTOMOBILE PARTS and
visi.com RUBBER GOODS!

On 2008-01-07, Richard B. Gilbert <rgilbert88@comcast.net> wrote:
> News wrote:
>>
>>
>> LHA wrote:
>>
>>> If the cellular companies provided the service and support that their
>>> customers desire and deserve, they would NOT need to lock us in with
>>> long, expensive contracts. Why do we tolerate it?
>>>
>>> Discuss...
>>>
>>
>>
>> Huh? I've been month to month for more than eight years.
>
> Yeah, but sooner or later you need a new phone. . . .

So go buy one on eBay, newegg, or Craig's List for $30. Nobody
is forcing you to take a "free" phone and sign a contract.

--
Grant Edwards grante Yow! How's the wife?
at Is she at home enjoying
visi.com capitalism?

In message <47826BC4.6030500@comcast.net> "Richard B. Gilbert"
<rgilbert88@comcast.net> wrote:

>Yeah, but sooner or later you need a new phone. . . .

So buy one at full price if you prefer. As it turns out, with many
phones the discount is higher then the early termination penalty, so you
really can't lose.

In message <Xns9A1E6E232D4E8VeebleFetzer@127.0.0.1> Bert Hyman
<bert@iphouse.com> wrote:

>With no contract, you'd be expected to bring your own phone or pay the
>retail price.

Even then, it can be tough to find a contract-less post-paid plan.

Personally, I'm not stressing about the early termination penalty when
bringing my own phone, instead I am planning to just take the free
phone, sell it, and pocket the cash.

If I pay out the contract, I won't be as far behind. If not, I win.

"LHA" <nobody@nobody1.com1> wrote in message
news:zCsgj.3377$El5.2810@newssvr22.news.prodigy.ne t...
> If the cellular companies provided the service and support that their
> customers desire and deserve, they would NOT need to lock us in with long,
> expensive contracts.

Not true. Historically contracts were used by carriers to recover the costs
of phones, which tended to cost much more than most people were willing to
"pony up" for. In other words, the marketing guys figured out it's easier to
sell a phone for $39 and then have them subscribe for, say, $40/mo than sell a
phone for $239 and subscribe for $30/mo.