a revolutionary idea in mobile phone service

[anp4yanks]

Rather then adding more fuel to the fire (specifically http://www.howardchui.com/forums/sh...75&goto=newpost) I will create a new thread containing what I think would satisfy every mobile phone user and create a better product offered across the board.

*Abolish cellular contracts*

In a free enterprise system, the buyer goes with the best product available to them. (perhaps the definition is incorrect) The point is that say for arguments sake (no flaming on this) Verizon is the best service available in NYC, and someone goes with Sprint service finding that service is satisfactory but no part of the service is better then marginal. Now they have a colleague who is a Verizon customer and they see that there service is better in every way. Shouldn't they be FREE to change over to Verizon without paying some ridiculous contract termination fee?

Perhaps the best example of this is what happened to (if I remember correctly) joestedman's family members. If cellular towers are re-aligned or for whatever reason cellular service deteriorates (which is by no fault of the consumer, such as a new building blocking the tower in a major way) the user should be able to stop service on their phone.

If 4 months after I sign my contract (with a national or local plan), I move to say, St. Louis and the Verizon coverage there is terrible, they should either change my area code to a local number or allow me to leave them.

Providers could offer incentives for signing contracts such as GOOD SERVICE and CS (but seriously, cash savings on phone service like Verizon is now doing with phone contracts by waiving activation fee and $30 off the price of the phone (at least here in NY))

That's all I can think of right now so...

LET THE FLAMING BEGIN (just thought I'd give an invitation since it's going to happen anyway and now some people won't seem as rude )

[skeptical]

And what? Carriers give up the lock in?

[anp4yanks]

precisely, if a company was confident in it's service and CS, they would have no worries of losing customers.

[Xirc]

Ahh...so you're suggesting that instead of being locked in for service customers should be left to their own will?

In that case maybe customers should be responsible for paying the cost of acquisition right up front so there is no risk to the company. Thus, the company would do what they can to keep them, but the customer could still leave if they wanted. But then again, who would pay a company $500 for the right to sign up for their service (not to mention additional costs for the handset).

Customers do not choose the best service, customers choose what they THINK is the best service. Whether it be based on actual coverage, price, handset selection, or whether they are schitzo and think the CEO of the company is hiding in their attic (don't laugh, I'm serious, I've had this one before).

Besides, the purpose of contracts is not to lock you into a sub-par service provider, its to ensure that when a company spends $500 to sign you up you won't leave after 2 weeks and leave them at a loss.

So sign on the dotted line and hand over all your money!

[Xirc]

Oh, and if you don't want contracts does that mean you don't want price protection? Would you advocate companies forcing you to change rate plans because you signed up for a limited time offer and now its over? After all, you're not on a contract so if you don't like it you can always leave....

A well thought out contract decision will have numerous benefits for both the customer and the company. A poorly researched and hasty decision is what most often results in trouble.

[Xirc]

By the way I'm not trying to start an argument, I'm just playing devils advocate...somebody has to argue the side of the capitalist pigs

[BlackCeasar]

Xirc you are write on point .

But, I can't speak for other companies but I can speak about ATTWS. If it is a known technical issue and it was going on for more than a month and service went down hill because of it, ATTWS will let you out of your contract, if you speak to a good CS Rep. When I speak to the new hires at the company I always end my speech with "I would rather the customer be happy with someone else than unhappy with me"
Meaning, If our customer is unhappy about a service issue that cannot be fixed immediatley and the customer counts on his/her service, I would rather the customer cancel service without penalty and go to someone who could provide the service that the customer needs. Instead of forcing the customer to "honor" their contracts with sub-par service and having the customer mad. At least with the first option the customer might come back, with the second option the customer will never come back.

As far as no contracts is concerned get pre-paid service, and you are free to switch services as much as you like.

[joestedman]

anp4yanks, I like your idea!

But in the real world it won't happen. In this day of mergers and buyouts the dollar value per line/ customer is adleast 3 times as much if not more with a contract than without! This stops carrier hopping. And can give a carrier away to plan out their network capacity and revenue stream.

[Xirc]

Originally posted by BlackCeasar

As far as no contracts is concerned get pre-paid service, and you are free to switch services as much as you like.

I'm not sure about you U.S. folk, but in Canada you can get pretty much any service on a month to month basis with no contract. The only problem is you usually have to pay about $100 canadian extra for the handset up front.

Then they complain that the phones are "free"...

I want a free phone with no contract and unlimited mintues and I want you to pay me for using it!

[bagsnatcher]

no contracts would really be great. but then as was pointed out the cost of the phone would go up. in the end everything balances out. the customer thinks he gets a good deal (some $$ off the price) and the fact that he gets into a 1 year contract doesn't seem to matter all that much. just like with the 99.99 vs 100 $. the customer involuntarily rounds the 99.99 down to 90 instead of 100. it's all psychology man

[Skylinepilot]

I agree with Xirc as well

I think the price of the handset would go up significantly. Are each handset sold to make a profit? No, at the price it cost the company to buy it? No. Am I wrong? Maybe, but this is how I look at it.... If I can go to my provider and by this tiny phone that voice dials, caller ID, Download pictures, Li-ion battery and can be used up to 2 miles away from a cell tower but be cheaper than $150 that is great compared to going to a Circuit City or Best Buy and buying a 2.4 Ghz home phone that works 20 ft. from the base, simple display for Caller ID and a Ni-Mh battery for this huge clunker at $200 doesn't it seem funny that this inferior technology is more expensive. That is why if you buy a battery and a charger for your phone it may end up more than buying the new handset as a kit.

If handsets are sold W/O service a simple phone would possibly range in the $200's to $300's and a phone like a Sanyo or a Motorola V-60 would be through the roof and unaffordable. Each provider or phone retailer would be expecting to make some profit off of this overpriced phones.
As far as those users who pay to insure their phone who would want to cover them? As a provider you bring this phone nearing several hundred dollars and next month the user loses it you have to dish out money to replace it but the user has given you $50. Now that you have set them up and you are having a hard time using their service they decide to quit once you have replaced their phone. Unless they are going to be providers that do not offer Insurance at all, but then people have a $900 piece of merchandise that can be lost or stolen in the wink of an eye. I think it is too risky.

They still need contracts because at the costs they are handing, some phones for free, and setting the service up (including paying FCC to assign you a # and so forth) it wouldn't be worth it to have you quit 2 months later. They give you 2 weeks, a month or whatever to figure out if they are the one for you and if you return the phone even then they are out a bunch of money. Basically my post is sticking/explaining the companies for them but the way I look at it through a business perspective is either you do it this way or you will be out on the street if you would have done it the other.

Just a little to say and what I have tried to make sense of on my own.... As weird as it is to figure out these processess for the first time