Canadian Shutdown at ATT store

Originally Posted by AdmiralAK

AFAIK I think it may be illegal to refuse legal tender for the purchase of good and services.
If you have money and if they are selling something - they are obligated to accept your money for the given good/service

Originally Posted by ericdraven

Is AT&T clamping down on who gets one and who doesn't now?
No plan then no iPhone policy?


Sheesh...

Originally Posted by mekkio

Just a head's up to those thinking of popping across the border: I got shut down twice at the ATT store in Bellingham, WA trying to buy an iPhone

The first time, I casually walked in and said I would like to purchase the 8 gb phone. The guy went to the back to grab the phone, then walked me to the cash.

"Do you have a driver's license I can look at?"
"Oh, this is a gift for someone and I will be paying cash."
"OK, but I still need to see some ID."
"I'm not from around here. I have a Passport in the car - is that OK?"
"No. We have orders from "above" that iPhones can only be sold to people US ID."

Same thing with the second guy a day later, but I asked him to please tell me where on the ATT site, on signage in the store, etc.... this policy was stated. He couldn't find anything but still refused to sell me the phone - I had to drive another hour and change to get one from the Apple store

Dude said that the email was sent out to every ATT store across the country?? Anyone else run into this?

All is well now though and the iPhone is working perfectly on Rogers

Originally Posted by ericdraven

I don't know if this is the case now but my friend's cousin who is a resident in the states - Detroit was going to pick up 2 iPhones for us at a AT&T store and wouldn't let him buy it straight up ...

They wanted him to take a plan with it and told him that was the only way he was going to get it...

Is AT&T clamping down on who gets one and who doesn't now?
No plan then no iPhone policy?


Sheesh...

Originally Posted by AdmiralAK

AFAIK I think it may be illegal to refuse legal tender for the purchase of good and services.
If you have money and if they are selling something - they are obligated to accept your money for the given good/service

Originally Posted by Red Setter

They're also within their rights to demand a contract. As stated - all the ads state "2 year activation required"

You'll see in the next few days that will be amended to read: 2 year activation required "at time of purchase" so that they can demand you prove you're a customer or have you open an account with them prior to selling you the phone

Just go to an Apple store. I seriously doubt Apple is going to get involved with creating ATT accounts or verifying service before selling phones

Originally Posted by richy240

No, Apple doesn't care as much as AT&T. Sure, they get a cut, but I imagine they profit from the sale of the device more than their cut of the monthly fees. (I could be wrong here though - I don't know the economics of wireless service.)

Originally Posted by fidoguru101

Dude I had the same problem same store, there losers there.

I had to drive a little further and go to the MT.Vernon AT&T store they finally sold me 2, on the basis i took them home and activated via iTunes.

Bellingham AT&T employee's are all doorknobs you call them they say 1 thing, you show up there they tell you another; horrible customer service.

Originally Posted by samab

What do you people expect?

The only doorknobs are people who don't realize that these people work on commissions and border towns like Bellingham (60-70 kms away from Vancover) getting all these Canadians buying up those iphones and not activating them with AT&T.

What these sales people should do is sell you the iphone and copy your license plate --- then call ahead the border patrol to make sure you declare the iphone and pay the import duties.

Originally Posted by marktang

yeah it is not illegal not to sell. they can refuse to sell to anyone if they want.

Originally Posted by scaredpoet

HOWEVER, you should keep in mind that if you are paying by Mastercard or Visa, it is a violation of the merchant agreement to require ID for any purchase.

You can report any Mastercard merchant requiring ID here, and Mastercard can fine them for each infraction.

Originally Posted by mekkio

I would say that the whole business model is a bit flawed - does ATT not make anything on the hardware? Does the salesperson not make any commission on the hardware sale? Even if the margin is slim, I could have been in and out in 3 minutes, and as a Canadian, not even a potential customer anyway. I'm in retail and I'll take a quick, easy sale any day.

I had a nice drive down the I-5 anyway and Apple was happy to sell, so not a huge deal, but it does make me think that ATT didn't think through all the implications of their deal with Apple.

Originally Posted by Red Setter

If ATT is turning away sales of iPhones that they feel will not be activated with them you can rest assured the profit margin on them is not large enough for them to be othered with the sale.

My guess would be they see 10% per phone - in other words the restocking fee for returning an activated phone

Originally Posted by sl55on20s

Save the hassle and buy the phone on eBay. I paid $500 with overnight shipping for a brand new s/w unlocked iphone 2 weeks ago and the seller low balled the value and I was charged like $15 in taxes.

Originally Posted by samab

What do you people expect?

The only doorknobs are people who don't realize that these people work on commissions and border towns like Bellingham (60-70 kms away from Vancover) getting all these Canadians buying up those iphones and not activating them with AT&T.

What these sales people should do is sell you the iphone and copy your license plate --- then call ahead the border patrol to make sure you declare the iphone and pay the import duties.

Originally Posted by Red Setter

They don't make much profit on ANY handset. That's why they all but give them to you for free with a conract

The contract is where they make their money

Originally Posted by CyniKal.Mindset

just shoulda said you goto school in the states and you need a damn phone!!!!!!!!!!!

Originally Posted by fidoguru101

Sell it to me at Full Price i don't care... I declared all my stuff. They're just stupid, I sell phones outright to American's all the time they're paying me for it so I don't care what they do with the phone.

Its just stupid in my opinion

Originally Posted by samab

They are selling the iphone at full price. They just aren't paying their employees if the iphones aren't activated on the AT&T network.

If you don't understand the difference, then the only stupid person is you. And if Rogers or Fido (whoever you work for) doesn't pay you any commissions for all those phones you sold to Americans --- you would have done the same thing.

Originally Posted by Red Setter

With all of this going on at the ATT camp, has anyone had any feedback from T-Mobile?

What is their stance on putting an iPhone on their network, knowing that it is obviously an unsupported unlock?

Originally Posted by cam'ron

That is retarded. In the time it takes them to check your id and shut you down, the transaction would be half over, how hard is it to sell someone something. You would have to be a real a$$ to turn someone away because you don't get a piece. It isn't as if they don't get a wage.

Originally Posted by Red Setter

With all of this going on at the ATT camp, has anyone had any feedback from T-Mobile?

What is their stance on putting an iPhone on their network, knowing that it is obviously an unsupported unlock?

Last week the CSR's at Rogers were intrigued by what I was attemptng to do and pleased to hear it was successful. But I've been reluctant to say too much to T-Mo when inquiring about their service. I've implied I plan to use an unlocked Treo 680, since they are not bound contractually lke the iPhone is.

I know with CDMA phones Network A will not allow you to use a phone from Network B (even if they were compatible) unless Network A releases it. So I'm just curious how they're going to deal with the obviously in breach of contract phones flooding their network.

Originally Posted by Red Setter

Cell phone carriers give up the profit on just about all their hardware when bought under contract.

That's why a Razr w/24 month contract is $49 but bought stand alone it's $199. They know they've got you by the short hairs for 2 yrs so they can afford to be 'generous' and 'give you' your phone

Originally Posted by matthewc1

also the carrier probably only paid 49.00 for phone anyways,so they wasnt losing anything on the sale. carrier doesnt pay retail for equipment.what they pay is at wholesale price which is 50% off retail. then if they buy a large enough quantity of product,they get extra discounts off the wholesale price.so for that razr they probably paid less than 49.99 for it. no company sells anything for less than what they paid for it, if so they raise prices on other products to cover the difference in price.

Originally Posted by Red Setter

I have no sympathy for the corporations here - Apple or ATT, even though I can understand their position. But I do support their backing of their employees: by allowing them to restrict sales to people that will presumably activate with ATT they are at least trying to guarantee their commissions for them.

Originally Posted by samab

I won't go that far. I don't think that this is a "official" policy --- it is most likely that either the store manager or individual salesperson restricting its sales after they saw the weekly activation numbers.

Basically everything is AT&T's fault. Even without considering the iphone, Verizon Wireless has historically better base pay packages than Cingular stores. Also VZW sales commissions don't fluctuate because their net adds are very stable year round (i.e. they don't rely on the christmas season like Cingular). Better pay means better quality staff --- simple as that.

Months before the iphone launch, VZW stated that they rejected the Apple deal because Apple won't let their franchisee stores to sell the iphone. AT&T is screwing their own franchisees because they are not allowed to sell the iphone. Then AT&T agreed with this idiotic at home activation procedure that cause problems with their own corporate store employees.

Sure Apple made up these rules ---- but it is AT&T that agreed to them (and they don't have to). VZW isn't screwing their own franchisees and their own employees over.