Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 51

Thread: John Legere: 5 Years: Uncarrier from the Inside Out

  1. #31
    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    Posts
    215
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by themanhimself View Post
    They all have fees but I like T-Mobile phone policy better. I've bought prepaid T-Mobile phones and used them on their postpaid service right out of the box without issue. With Verizon I hated that six month policy and sounds like it may be 30 days now which is better but still adds to the cost of the phone.

    I also wish Verizon was more open to allowing other CDMA phones. That's a big reason I like T-Mobile policy better. If it's GSM there's a good chance I can at least get basic service. With a CDMA phone like sprint, prob a good chance I can't use it on Verizon unless maybe an iPhone and some other select phones.
    Yes, TMobile branded prepaid devices will work on TMobile postpaid, but metro pcs devices will not. Since TMobile sells the metro devices at a subsidy they have a service requirement with metro pcs before they will unlock them to use on TMobile. It's a 90 day service requirement on metro pcs. This isn't a fee. It's a requirement for getting the phone at a subsidized price. Verizon in box prepaid devices are usually sold at a subsidized price, thus they have a service requirement that has to met before they can be used on any other service besides Verizon prepaid. I still don't understand where Tmobiles unlocking policy is better? I think Tmobiles unlock policy on their in house prepaid devices is far worse, 1 year or 100 dollars and you still have to pay full cost for the device, metro is 90 days which the cheapest is 90 dollars for 3 months of service, and postpaid is 40 days of active service. Those are worse than verizons unlocking policy. The other things you mention I agree, but as far as just the unlocking policy, verizons is better than Tmobiles.

  2. #32
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Posts
    1,765
    Feedback Score
    0
    The carriers' claimed "subsidy" amounts are arbitrary at best, and usually fantastical. In very common situations where the "subsidized" device is sold at or above cost to the carrier, the real subsidy amount is $0.

    The claim "subsidized price" is really just a marketing trick.

  3. #33
    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    Posts
    215
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by NotABiot View Post
    The carriers' claimed "subsidy" amounts are arbitrary at best, and usually fantastical. In very common situations where the "subsidized" device is sold at or above cost to the carrier, the real subsidy amount is $0.

    The claim "subsidized price" is really just a marketing trick.
    That's an irrelevant argument. That's the same argument as well retail cost is overinflated. It holds no bearing on the conversation. If a company is selling a device that retails for 200 for 100 dollars they are selling it at a subsidized cost. What they paid for it is meaningless. It's the same as if I paid 200 bucks for a 2000 dollar TV, and sold it to you brand new for 400 dollars. What I paid for it is meaningless, you got a TV at a 1600 dollar discount. Your argument here actually makes Tmobiles in house prepaid unlocking policy even worse. They are charging full retail for their prepaid devices on top of having a 12 month/100 dollar service requirement.



    Again, bash Verizon on a lot of things, but, their unlocking policy is one of the better ones around and it is far better than the one TMobile currently has.

  4. #34
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Posts
    1,765
    Feedback Score
    0
    "If a company is selling a device that retails for 200 for 100 dollars they are selling it at a subsidized cost"

    Not if the original cost is $100 or less. Words like "subsidy" do have meaning. What they paid for it determines if the term "subsidy" can even apply to the retail price.

    In this specific example, the subsidy amount is $0.

    Now, the $1600 or $2000 prices you named... Those are the only meaningless values being discussed. The "full retail price" is pulled from thin air, and often hardly anyone charges it.

    The fact remains that the term "subsidy" can't apply for a phone being sold at cost or above. And then no one can justify a claim that stiff unlocking fees are making up for anything.

  5. #35
    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    Posts
    215
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by NotABiot View Post
    "If a company is selling a device that retails for 200 for 100 dollars they are selling it at a subsidized cost"

    Not if the original cost is $100 or less. Words like "subsidy" do have meaning. What they paid for it determines if the term "subsidy" can even apply to the retail price.

    In this specific example, the subsidy amount is $0.

    Now, the $1600 or $2000 prices you named... Those are the only meaningless values being discussed. The "full retail price" is pulled from thin air, and often hardly anyone charges it.

    The fact remains that the term "subsidy" can't apply for a phone being sold at cost or above. And then no one can justify a claim that stiff unlocking fees are making up for anything.
    Again, this argument has no bearing on this conversation but I'll continue. Verizon prepaid sells the Moto e4 plus for 99 dollars, the same device unlocked from Motorola is 229. You are buying it at a subsidized cost for 99 dollars, thus are held to a service requirement from Verizon prepaid if you want to use it elsewhere. Again, your argument actually makes Tmobiles unlocking policy on their in house prepaid devices even worse, they are charging retail price and also have a service requirement of 12 months/100 dollars on top of that to unlock it. You never answered the question, what makes Tmobiles unlocking policy better than Verizon's exactly? What part of it do you find superior.

  6. #36
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Posts
    1,765
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by ksych1 View Post
    Again, this argument has no bearing on this conversation but I'll continue. Verizon prepaid sells the Moto e4 plus for 99 dollars, the same device unlocked from Motorola is 229. You are buying it at a subsidized cost for 99 dollars, thus are held to a service requirement from Verizon prepaid if you want to use it elsewhere. Again, your argument actually makes Tmobiles unlocking policy on their in house prepaid devices even worse, they are charging retail price and also have a service requirement of 12 months/100 dollars on top of that to unlock it. You never answered the question, what makes Tmobiles unlocking policy better than Verizon's exactly? What part of it do you find superior.
    Whether or not there is a subsidy is based on what the E4 costs to them, and not the suggested retail price. If there is no subsidy, the connection to (and justification for) your "thus you are held.." clause vanishes completely. Without an actual subsidy involved to make up for, the unlocking fee is nothing but another arbitrary "junk fee", no matter what theycall it.

    -------

    TheManHimself gave a good description of TMO unlocking policies.

    Danny, any wisdom from Legere on junk unlocking fees?

  7. #37
    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    Posts
    215
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by NotABiot View Post
    Whether or not there is a subsidy is based on what the E4 costs to them, and not the suggested retail price. If there is no subsidy, the connection to (and justification for) your "thus you are held.." clause vanishes completely. Without an actual subsidy involved to make up for, the unlocking fee is nothing but another arbitrary "junk fee", no matter what theycall it.

    -------

    TheManHimself gave a good description of TMO unlocking policies.

    Danny, any wisdom from Legere on junk unlocking fees?
    You still won't answer the question, you just want to try to change what you said. What part of the "junk fees" then TMobile charges to unlock their devices makes their policy any better? What can legere say about unlocking? His policies are worse. Again I'll post them

    Unlock eligibility for monthly phones, tablets, and mobile Internet devices

    The device must have been active on the T-Mobile network for at least 40 days on the requesting line.

    If the device is financed using T-Mobile’s*Equipment Installment Plan (EIP)*,or*if it's leased through*JUMP! On Demand™, all payments must be satisfied and the device must be paid in full unless otherwise specified.

    If the device is on an account that is under a service contract term, at least 18 consecutive monthly payments must have been made or the account must have migrated to Simple Choice no contract rate plan.

    If the device is associated with a canceled account, the account balance must be zero, including all pending charges.

    *

    Unlock eligibility for Pay in Advance (Prepaid) phones, tablets, and mobile Internet devices

    The device on the requesting line has been active for more than one year on the T-Mobile network.

    If the device has been active for less than one year on the requesting line, the Pay in Advance account associated with the device must have had more than $100 in refills since device first use date. $100 in total refills is required for each device that is requested to be unlocked and does not include the initial activation payment.

    *https://support.t-mobile.com/docs/DOC-1588

    Tell me, what's better about that policy? Don't look for others to try to bail you out. Just answer the question. By your argument carriers should just charge what they pay for devices and let people take them wherever they want after they buy them. Doesn't sound like a sound business model to me, but that has nothing to do with unlocking policies. What do you exactly find better about Tmobiles policy? Or are you gonna wait for someone else to answer it for you?
    TMobile doesn't sell prepaid devices at subsidy yet still has a clause tied to it. A more expensive clause than verizons. So, I would like to know, what exactly is better about it?

  8. #38
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Posts
    1,765
    Feedback Score
    0
    "TMobile doesn't sell prepaid devices at subsidy..."

    Without knowing the cost to the carriers of these phones, we have no idea if the "subsidy" is actual or merely claimed, and without thay it can't be an excuse for anything.

    "your argument carriers should just charge what they pay for devices and let people take them wherever they want after they buy them."

    The first part? That's not my argument at all. I have no problem at all with carriers making a profit. But its false to call a sale of a phone "subsidized" if they are actually making a profit on it. Let's just be honest, that's all. If they sold the phone at a profit, there is no subsidy to make up for with a junk fee. Again, let's just be honest.

    As for the second part, that IS my argument. Why not let people do what they want with their phones: They bought them !

  9. #39
    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    Posts
    215
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by NotABiot View Post
    "TMobile doesn't sell prepaid devices at subsidy..."

    Without knowing the cost to the carriers of these phones, we have no idea if the "subsidy" is actual or merely claimed, and without thay it can't be an excuse for anything.

    "your argument carriers should just charge what they pay for devices and let people take them wherever they want after they buy them."

    The first part? That's not my argument at all. I have no problem at all with carriers making a profit. But its false to call a sale of a phone "subsidized" if they are actually making a profit on it. Let's just be honest, that's all. If they sold the phone at a profit, there is no subsidy to make up for with a junk fee. Again, let's just be honest.

    As for the second part, that IS my argument. Why not let people do what they want with their phones: They bought them !
    I know what manufacturers charge for the devices and I know what TMobile charges for their prepaid devices. Unless on sale( which is rare, and when on sale it is usually not a discount on the device but rather a free included airtime card) TMobile prepaid devices are very close to MSRP. A little research would help you before you just make false claims which brings up back to your original point.

    They can do what they want with their phones, they aren't forced to buy them from a carrier at all. If they buy them from a carrier though they follow carrier rules on the unlocking of the phone. Which was your point with "Verizon's terrible unlocking policies" you keep referring to in these threads. So I'll ask again, what part of Tmobiles unlocking policy do you find better than Verizon's? It seems you have nothing to back up your claims.

  10. #40
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Posts
    1,765
    Feedback Score
    0
    The man guy answered quite a while ago. If you like I will copy and paste him but I won't take credit

  11. #41
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Posts
    1,765
    Feedback Score
    0
    " TMobile prepaid devices are very close to MSRP. A little research would help you before you just make false claims which brings up back to your original point."

    Rest assured I would have researched it before I had made claims about how close TMobile prices were to manufacturer's suggested retail. However I made no such claims. Other than, as you can see, pointing out the obvious that the MSRP really doesn't mean a whole lot at all when discussing profit and subsidy matters.

  12. #42
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Posts
    1,765
    Feedback Score
    0
    "If they buy them from a carrier though they follow carrier rules on the unlocking of the phone"

    You bought it, it's yours. Having to pay some sort of exorbitant unlocking fee is a scam and a rip-off. Like buying a new car, and then having to go back to the dealer to give them $3,000 to find out the code to get into the driver door.



    More power to those who go to eBay to get cheap unlocking codes to avoid uncessary junk fees.

  13. #43
    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    Posts
    215
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by NotABiot View Post
    "If they buy them from a carrier though they follow carrier rules on the unlocking of the phone"

    You bought it, it's yours. Having to pay some sort of exorbitant unlocking fee is a scam and a rip-off. Like buying a new car, and then having to go back to the dealer to give them $3,000 to find out the code to get into the driver door.



    More power to those who go to eBay to get cheap unlocking codes to avoid uncessary junk fees.
    Still avoiding the question, that has nothing to do with unlocking policies, I think most people are well aware of where they can or can't buy devices from. Seems you commented on something you didn't know much about, got called out on it and now are trying to save face by totally changing the subject. It's common online.

    As far as the carriers unlocking policies (which was the original complaint you made) I think most TMobile customers would agree they would love to have Verizon's unlock policy. All postpaid devices factory unlocked out of the box and prepaid devices sold at over 100 off retail with only a 40 to 70 dollar service requirement to fully unlock? Yea I think most TMobile customers would agree that's far better than the unlock policy they currently have. Id take that policy over Tmobiles current policy any day. Gonna be hard to find someone who wouldn't.

  14. #44
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Posts
    1,765
    Feedback Score
    0
    ".Seems you commented on something you didn't know much about, got called out on it "

    I commented accurately on the high unlocking fee. You pointed out then that the fee only applies to Verizon prepaid. Which is a fair point. I admit that I did not know that. There you have your points!

    And discussing what a scam and a rip off the high unlocking fee is is not a change of that particular subject of unlocking fees. Even if it has strayed far from talking about John Legere.

  15. #45
    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    Posts
    215
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by NotABiot View Post
    ".Seems you commented on something you didn't know much about, got called out on it "

    I commented accurately on the high unlocking fee. You pointed out then that the fee only applies to Verizon prepaid. Which is a fair point. I admit that I did not know that. There you have your points!

    And discussing what a scam and a rip off the high unlocking fee is is not a change of that particular subject of unlocking fees. Even if it has strayed far from talking about John Legere.
    How do you feel about Tmobiles even higher "fee" for unlocking prepaid devices? Pretty crappy policy TMobile has on their prepaid unlocking huh? Is that a good move on legeres part? He prolly should change that. Anyways this topic has run its course. Now you know that Verizon indeed does have a better unlocking policy that TMobile, so you don't have to try to bring up this false notion that somehow Verizon's unlocking policy is terrible while Tmobiles is good. I'll say it one last time, there is plenty of legit reasons to bash Verizon wireless, plenty of stupid policies in place, their unlocking policy isn't one of them. It's one of the better in the industry and better than the one TMobile currently offers. In fact TMobile customers can actually find some good deals on Verizon devices and use them on TMobile.

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. enV, how to push # from the inside.
    By djturnz in forum LG
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 01-28-2009, 02:25 PM
  2. Replies: 4
    Last Post: 05-19-2006, 08:09 AM
  3. Clean your computer screen from the inside
    By Bob859 in forum Tech Talk
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 04-30-2005, 06:55 AM
  4. Replies: 5
    Last Post: 11-09-2004, 07:14 PM
  5. The inside .. Out
    By zedd in forum UIQ
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 07-10-2003, 09:50 AM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks