Related
Forgive me if this is already a known quantity around here, but I only just found out this evening that orders placed through Sprint for new devices can no longer be billed to your account. Apparently we now have to pay by credit or debit card up front when we want a new device.
dead78 said:
Forgive me if this is already a known quantity around here, but I only just found out this evening that orders placed through Sprint for new devices can no longer be billed to your account. Apparently we now have to pay by credit or debit card up front when we want a new device.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
yup found out a couple of months ...........i believe there should b a couple of threads on it
lballer69 said:
yup found out a couple of months ...........i believe there should b a couple of threads on it
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
they're saying it changed it on October 5. yet another way we're taking it in the pants as a result of Sprint getting the iPhone and another reason to never bother ordering a phone from Sprint.
yep blame that on the iphone
apple started this a few years ago, so no cash at all, even in person at the apple stores for iphones, as people were buying them stateside, and selling them overseas for huge markups, since they were not available at the time
gotta love Apple lol
Amd4life said:
yep blame that on the iphone
apple started this a few years ago, so no cash at all, even in person at the apple stores for iphones, as people were buying them stateside, and selling them overseas for huge markups, since they were not available at the time
gotta love Apple lol
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
yep, you're 100% right.
man, I was on the fence before about upgrading my Epic...there's no way in hell I'll do it now. when you look at everything that's gone lately, Sprint's shown they're willing to screw over their entire customer base for the sake of luring in new customers with this gimmick Apple crap. now they've got their big sales figures and they can all pat each other on the backs for a job well done.
do the other carriers require up front payment for their devices?
Just so you guys know, sprint is actually the last of all the big 4 carriers to get rid of bill to account for new phones. Its a fight against fraud. Cutting costs is necessary to keep providing the unlimited data plans. Saving money by reducing fraudulent purchases is one of the best ways to do this. There is a reason behind every choice the company makes. It may not always sound like the best when you first hear it but the reasons why typically justify the changes. Sprint tries really hard to provide what other carriers no longer do but there at reasons that other carriers have cut things, and with sprints new high end world phone lineup we are running into the same things.
Sent from my SPH-D710 using Tapatalk
lookout4theyeti said:
Just so you guys know, sprint is actually the last of all the big 4 carriers to get rid of bill to account for new phones. Its a fight against fraud. Cutting costs is necessary to keep providing the unlimited data plans. Saving money by reducing fraudulent purchases is one of the best ways to do this. There is a reason behind every choice the company makes. It may not always sound like the best when you first hear it but the reasons why typically justify the changes. Sprint tries really hard to provide what other carriers no longer do but there at reasons that other carriers have cut things, and with sprints new high end world phone lineup we are running into the same things.
Sent from my SPH-D710 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
frankly, the "we need to do this to keep unlimited data" excuse has lost its appeal. all I'm seeing is a fledgling company pulling back on service in order to accommodate the iPhone and keep itself in business. as it stands now, I live in an area where my data service is horrendous. calls to Sprint are essentially pointless since I'm given an endless string of excuses as to why I can't download faster than .2 Mbps on 3G and why I can't stay connected to 4G for more than a couple of minutes. I've been with Sprint for over 10 years and I've seen all aspects of quality within the company deteriorate considerably in that time. The simple fact is that they're network couldn't accommodate the demand of all the Android devices on it; I can't even imagine what the surge of new iPhones is going to do to service.
meanwhile, we're told that every courtesy we received is being taken away in order to assure a high level of service. that would be fine except there is no longer a high level of service to maintain. I've actually had Sprint tell me that their changes aren't so bad because they're simply doing what all the other carriers do; therein lies the crux of why having 3.5 carriers dominate a nation of roughly 400 million people isn't good for anyone. a struggling company in that setting has no incentive to do anything but keep its doors open. they've lost the will to differentiate because they no longer have to; their sole concern is to avoid being subsumed by one of their competitors. most investors (myself included) doubt Sprint's ability to sustain itself beyond the next couple of years because they're a poorly managed company who've become notorious for making extremely poor decisions - this recent backpedaling from WiMax is one of the worst.
so yeah, great we get unlimited data. we'll see how well that unlimited data that Sprint's stripped away all incentives for holds up when an already super-saturated capacity is unable to withstand the demand from this gadget they've bet the farm on.
I am usually on the side of the consumer but, this time, I think if you don't have the money to pay for it, why are you upgrading? Wait a month and get it when you have the money. I don't see why it was ever an option to begin with.
The only reason I am still on Sprint is becaue they have the number one best plan for my situation. If I didn't want unlimited data, or the best cutomer service, or the coolest new phones, I would go with MetroPCS. They have the best plan for someone like that. Shop around. Get what is best for you. I'm not preaching. I just want every customer out there to be as happy as can be.
It is probably better this way. When you charge to credit card, they don't add the weird few dollars here and there taxes in the taxes and surcharges sections (this is in addition to the tax they charged on the phone purchase itself) I probably got another $5-$6 in random taxes I had to complain about to get back.
I agree that data speeds on Sprints unlimited plan sucks. I will contest to that. Sprint's network simply is being overwhelmed from all the traffic they get from all the smartphones out there. So Sprint came up with a plan. The plan is going to cost $10b over time I think it was. To come up with the money Sprint has to cut cost and create more revenue. To cut cost Sprint got rid of certain luxuries we were receiving as consumers. To create more revenue Sprint fought to get the Iphone on board (Sprint announce this was their biggest sales day ever). Simple economics. Remember Sprint is a far 3rd behind the top two cash cows we know as AT&T and Verizon. Sprint is not financially stable right now but, making these necessary moves will help us as consumer in the long run. I know you pay now, and, you want it now, but, all we can really do is wait till Sprint finish's with their $10B project in your area.
Seriously? You all look at this as "exploiting the customer"? What they got rid of was effectively an interest free credit card that people were abusing. No, doesn't make any business sense at all, certainly not.
True exploitation would be them deciding to charge interest on your balance.
Sent from my SPH-D710 using xda premium
buggerritt said:
I am usually on the side of the consumer but, this time, I think if you don't have the money to pay for it, why are you upgrading? Wait a month and get it when you have the money. I don't see why it was ever an option to begin with.
The only reason I am still on Sprint is becaue they have the number one best plan for my situation. If I didn't want unlimited data, or the best cutomer service, or the coolest new phones, I would go with MetroPCS. They have the best plan for someone like that. Shop around. Get what is best for you. I'm not preaching. I just want every customer out there to be as happy as can be.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ive been doing bta for years without problems from sprint. The problem was me, with the subject the post is about. Im pretty impulsive at times. More that once ive had financial department calling me wanting money because im past due. I couldnt pay the price of the phone (usually full price because i was in mid contract) and my bill up to date in a month or less. I kept telling myself, after i would get my account completely paid up to date, that i wouldnt do this again and would only get another phone if i had the money in hand to pay for the phone. Sometimes financial emergencies happen that are unforseen and they can really put a person behind for awhile and its a struggle to get caught up. Thats one of my character defects, i admit it (for the first time). Its not sprint's fault for this, its mine for being impulsive and irresponsible when it comes to finances.
I dont know why i felt the need to say this, but it had something to do with the subject and i shared my experience (and foolishness) with you guys.
Shame on me, i know!
I'm right there with you man! I sold a Dell Venue Pro so I could get my Epic Touch and I still have an Atrix on At&t and am looking at over $500 if I leave At&t. All that so I could get a 1/2 inch bigger screen and a slightly faster phone. Oh well at least I got a good one, no Los or any other issues thus far.
Sent from my SPH-D710 using xda premium
I just paid my Sprint bill the other day. With activation, the phone, and my normal bill, it was $578.06. No more bta? Who cares. If you don't have the money, you probably shouldn't buy the phone anyway.
Sent from my SPH-D710 using XDA App
Verizon still allows billing to your account. This last carrier nonsense isn't true
heygrl said:
Verizon still allows billing to your account. This last carrier nonsense isn't true
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
that's what I thought. quite frankly, this argument that deadbeats have ruined the bta is a bunch of b.s. because that would be a punitive major and not something supposedly introduced to insure a high level of future service. the reason why bta is a solid option is that it means not having to rely on Sprint to refund your money in the event you decide to return a recently purchased phone. what this new move does is allow Sprint access to the customer's money immediately, which is actually a better move from an accounting standpoint since funds collected can be immediately invested. however, my biggest beef with this change of policy is that like all the other changes we've endured in recent weeks, they're all being done to accommodate the iPhone. like many others, I'm not remotely convinced of Sprint's able to even stay in business long enough to see all these supposed service improvements take place, so right now (and for the immediate future) all that's happening is Sprint is pulling back on customer services to pander to the iPhone.
Like another poster said this is to accommodate fraud. I work for another big name phone company and this is a way to keep people from calling in and ordering multiple phones on an account and having them shipped and once you see that these phones were ordered and you did not order them you call sprint and they have to foot that bill. If there is a credit card used it is tied to the person who used it and fraud is dealt with easier through the CC companies because they have more info. The FCC are coming up with all these rules to help us as consumers. It kinda makes it harder but safer. Anyone who knows your information can order on your account and that is scary. We see people on this forum who call in and tell lies all the time. Fruad is no joke. If it makes it safer why not?
Sent from my hand crippling Epic 4g Touch
Thanks for sharing this. I think you hit the nail on the head and I wish more people were willing to look at their own situation objectively and take some personal responsibility.
Sprint is a business, making business decisions. If they need to make changes to stay viable, then they should make them. If I decide at some point I don't like them, I can go somewhere else. It's the beauty of free enterprise and consumer choice.
oscarthegrouch said:
Ive been doing bta for years without problems from sprint. The problem was me, with the subject the post is about. Im pretty impulsive at times. More that once ive had financial department calling me wanting money because im past due. I couldnt pay the price of the phone (usually full price because i was in mid contract) and my bill up to date in a month or less. I kept telling myself, after i would get my account completely paid up to date, that i wouldnt do this again and would only get another phone if i had the money in hand to pay for the phone. Sometimes financial emergencies happen that are unforseen and they can really put a person behind for awhile and its a struggle to get caught up. Thats one of my character defects, i admit it (for the first time). Its not sprint's fault for this, its mine for being impulsive and irresponsible when it comes to finances.
I dont know why i felt the need to say this, but it had something to do with the subject and i shared my experience (and foolishness) with you guys.
Shame on me, i know!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Who orders from Sprint anyway? There's always some place cheaper to get the phone of you're eligible for an upgrade. Ordering from places like Amazon or Wirefly at the very least saves you tax.
Sent from my SPH-D710 using Tapatalk
My local Best Buy is great about returns and will price match any other vendor that has a unit in stock. I've never ordered from Sprint.
Sent from my SPH-D710 using xda premium
I know the Sprint Surcharges are just fees Sprint wants to charge their customers because they are too greedy to pay it on their own as a benefit to their customers. But I am curious as to what the Federal-Univ Serv Assess Non-LD is because I have not been able to find any exact information on it. I tried chatting with a Rep but she could not give me any real answer on what it is other than a blanket statement saying its based on taxes Sprint has to pay. Im paying $7.21 for something I have no idea about.
Under the Government Fees & Taxes, I also see a California State-Univ Lifeline Serv Charge for $1.21. I need answers
I also need answers too. Every month the "Federal Taxes" are high and high.
I also have my employee discount and when change the $130.00 for two line to $110.00 first line and $19.99 the second my bill go high again.
When I get my phone the bill was $141.90 now $151.50. Yes $10!!!
Im starting to hate Sprint, but they are the only with unlimited data.
Sent from my SPH-D700 using Tapatalk 2
Does no one really care about this?
call your congressman...
it is a federally asses fee. although sprint is the one to choose to pass this along to you, it is because it is assesed to them. would you feel better if they just said that your plan is actually 139.99 instead and still put it toward paying this fee?
30 seconds with google came up with this government page that explains what these fees are:
http://transition.fcc.gov/cgb/phonebills/samplePhonebill.html
As far as whether sprint should pay it for you, if they did that, who's money would they use to pay it? They'd have to get it from somewhere, so it would come from money they charge you for you service. So, instead of burying the costs they incur, they list it.
They could pull it out of the pure profit $10/mo data fee they charge, among all the other fees they charge to double the advertised price. Straight Talk and Cricket seem to do just fine under $70/mo without all the bogus fees. Perhaps they should ask these companies how they can afford to do it at half the price.
wingbat said:
They could pull it out of the pure profit $10/mo data fee they charge, among all the other fees they charge to double the advertised price.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Trolololwut? Sprint has been operating at a net LOSS of hundreds of millions of dollars for 5 years now. I don't know where you get the idea that Sprint is hoarding a bunch of "profits." Even AT&T and Verizon, with all their luxurious capital (and often $20-30/month higher average bills, might I add) are still burning through it to build their own completely spectrum-segregated LTE networks on top of maintaining and improving their 3G networks. That cost billions upon billions every year, and Sprint is a very distant 3rd. Then you have to factor in the money that they have to give back to Lightsquared for backing out of their deal to buy LTE spectrum using satellite coverage (basically the spectrum satellites were interfering with some GPS devices and satellites, so the FCC denied them approval). Oh, and don't forget the $4 Billion that Sprint had to pay Apple to get the iPhone for the next 3 years.
wingbat said:
Straight Talk and Cricket seem to do just fine under $70/mo without all the bogus fees. Perhaps they should ask these companies how they can afford to do it at half the price.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Oh, I guess you didn't know that Cricket and Straight Talk don't actually own their network infrastructure. They rent out the towers from those with the resources to build them, as in AT&T, Verizon, T-Mobile, and SPRINT. That's why the cheapo carriers can afford to offer those low prices, they just thrown the major carriers some money. Of course, the trade-off is that service sucks outside of the major cities, so good luck actually making calls in between. Sprint, however, doesn't have the luxury of bumming off of Verizon's towers, you know, because they're direct competitors on a national scale.
Honestly, how the hell do you think this phone company can afford to charge me $85/month for unlimited EVERYTHING and still build/maintain a fast and consistent 3G and 4G network? If you want to pick a fight, pick it with AT&T and Verizon, but since you're on the one US carrier with a couple BILLIONS of dollars of debt, you'd best sit down and appreciate your relatively cheap bill.
I pick a fight with Sprint because they offer unlimited everything, on a 1x connection that's slower than dialup, and then charge an additional $10/mo for that luxury because I have an Android phone. It takes less time to call someone than for the email to send after I hit send. They can afford to offer unlimited everything for $85/mo because they charge $130/mo for it, and are not capable of providing what they sell.
At least when I had Verizon, they warned me that 3g may not work in my area. But it did, and still does, as well as their recently rolled out LTE. Sprint? Nothing planned in the next 6 months. Perhaps Sprint should consider leasing tower space if they want to remain relevant over the next 10 years. Right now, they can't compete on coverage nor connectivity.
Thread moved
Please post all ??? in Q&A
Thanks
FNM
Dante of the Inferno said:
Trolololwut? Sprint has been operating at a net LOSS of hundreds of millions of dollars for 5 years now. I don't know where you get the idea that Sprint is hoarding a bunch of "profits." Even AT&T and Verizon, with all their luxurious capital (and often $20-30/month higher average bills, might I add) are still burning through it to build their own completely spectrum-segregated LTE networks on top of maintaining and improving their 3G networks.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Im sorry but that's bull. If Sprint was doing so badly, they wouldnt be here for this long and they wouldnt be adding LTE or spending money on the Iphone or anything like that. You know they are profiting or else why would they continue to run their business?
Also, At&T and Verizon may be spending billions on the LTE network but they are also making billions on top of knowing LTE will bring in more customers.
Dante of the Inferno said:
Oh, and don't forget the $4 Billion that Sprint had to pay Apple to get the iPhone for the next 3 years.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That Sprint chose to pay. They saw a good marketing move when they saw it and sure it cost them a bit more than they wanted (or did it?) but think about how fast they will make that money back with all the transfers to Sprint's unlimited plan?
Dante of the Inferno said:
Honestly, how the hell do you think this phone company can afford to charge me $85/month for unlimited EVERYTHING and still build/maintain a fast and consistent 3G and 4G network?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Because: 1. Its 2012 and those technologies arent new, and 2. I pay $40 a month for "unlimited" gigabytes of unlimited information, media, news, etc on what is the Internet. No need to pay to connect extra devices, no need to pay extra for certain websites, no need to pay for more than one user.
Whose Money
poit said:
...As far as whether sprint should pay it for you, if they did that, who's money would they use to pay it?
Whose money? Start with Sprint's new CEO Marcelo Claure: "Sprint will pay Claure $1.5 million a year in salary, on top of a $500,000 signing bonus, and provide potential performance-based bonuses that could be twice his salary or larger, according to a company filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission. He also will receive potential stock and options awards worth $24 million when granted to him, the filing said."
From the Kansas City Star article "Sprint names Brightstar founder CEO, replacing Dan Hesse". I'd provide a link, but as a new member here I'm not allowed. Google the article title to find the full article if interested.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
ATT mobile insurance is $7 per month. But the deductible for the i317 is $200.
Do you think it is worth it to have? is ATT's replacement policy similar to that of Apple for instance. meaning with 100% satisfaction rate or do they give people hard time before replacing any device.
Thanks
I had them replace my note twice for charging port issues, they never gave me any grief. In fact they send a brand new device the second time.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I317 using Tapatalk 2
It is hard for me to pay those crazy fees now for insurance. I would compare Squaretrade, at least that has a capped rate(one time fee vs monthly).
Here is the kicker for AT&T that they don't always tell you: no matter what is wrong with the phone, after 12 months you pay the $199 deductible. So you paid $8x12 months(or more) and the phone fails to power on but has ZERO damage, you are still required to pay the $199 deductible. That is $296 minimum @ 12 months. Squaretrade is upfront fee of around $100(they offer coupons so it varies look on Facebook) and a deductible of $100(I think).
You need to do the math to see if it is worth it for you. I personally will never pay those fees again bc they are wasted if you don't use it. Your screen is the most likely thing to repair and odds are I can repair it for less than $200. Basically around the same amount of money but I only spend it if needed. Also, do not forget that there is now a real out of contract replacement available: Nexus 4. Once the back order is caught up in a month or two you would be able to get a high end replacement device for 299 or 349, again only spending money if you need to vs spending it every month regardless.
All in your perceived value.
Gvndeb60 said:
It is hard for me to pay those crazy fees now for insurance. I would compare Squaretrade, at least that has a capped rate(one time fee vs monthly).
Here is the kicker for AT&T that they don't always tell you: no matter what is wrong with the phone, after 12 months you pay the $199 deductible. So you paid $8x12 months(or more) and the phone fails to power on but has ZERO damage, you are still required to pay the $199 deductible. That is $296 minimum @ 12 months. Squaretrade is upfront fee of around $100(they offer coupons so it varies look on Facebook) and a deductible of $100(I think).
You need to do the math to see if it is worth it for you. I personally will never pay those fees again bc they are wasted if you don't use it. Your screen is the most likely thing to repair and odds are I can repair it for less than $200. Basically around the same amount of money but I only spend it if needed. Also, do not forget that there is now a real out of contract replacement available: Nexus 4. Once the back order is caught up in a month or two you would be able to get a high end replacement device for 299 or 349, again only spending money if you need to vs spending it every month regardless.
All in your perceived value.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks for your argument... I was considering buying the insurance myself
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I317 using Tapatalk 2
Gvndeb60 said:
It is hard for me to pay those crazy fees now for insurance. I would compare Squaretrade, at least that has a capped rate(one time fee vs monthly).
Here is the kicker for AT&T that they don't always tell you: no matter what is wrong with the phone, after 12 months you pay the $199 deductible. So you paid $8x12 months(or more) and the phone fails to power on but has ZERO damage, you are still required to pay the $199 deductible. That is $296 minimum @ 12 months. Squaretrade is upfront fee of around $100(they offer coupons so it varies look on Facebook) and a deductible of $100(I think).
You need to do the math to see if it is worth it for you. I personally will never pay those fees again bc they are wasted if you don't use it. Your screen is the most likely thing to repair and odds are I can repair it for less than $200. Basically around the same amount of money but I only spend it if needed. Also, do not forget that there is now a real out of contract replacement available: Nexus 4. Once the back order is caught up in a month or two you would be able to get a high end replacement device for 299 or 349, again only spending money if you need to vs spending it every month regardless.
All in your perceived value.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Have you ever used them? never heard of them.
I have not personally used Squaretrade, but they are highly reputable and I read nothing but good things about them on other forums.
To put it in perspective, IMO, Apple offers the best extended warranty called AppleCare+ for $99 for their devices. I have used it before on my iPad and my wife's iPhone. It is amazing and they cover everything. On imore.com which is an apple site, the forums have lots of people saying they choose Squaretrade over AppleCare.
That is just an example, again I have not used them so I am just sharing what I have read.
But I have used Best Buy coverage, AT&T insurance, and Sprint insurance. Best Buy was horrible in all ways as was Sprint. Both grilled you with tons of questions, and honestly looked for ways to void your warranty. Sprint even called a huge bright white spot on the middle of my HTC EVO a cosmetic problem. Both AT&T and Sprint use Asurian as the insurance company, and both times I have had to swap phones they gave me damaged models. With Sprint I went through about 4 Palm Pres before getting one that wasn't noticeably damaged. ATT swapped my Atrix out without any hassle but the first one was damaged as well.
I could be biased bc of my experiences but remember they are not in business to help you, they are in business to make money. Do the math to see if it is worth it. I will say that I have used it before for the first 2-4 months when a device is first released bc of the high cost. Normally the out of contract cost drops after a month or two.
Good luck.
Gvndeb60 said:
I have not personally used Squaretrade, but they are highly reputable and I read nothing but good things about them on other forums.
To put it in perspective, IMO, Apple offers the best extended warranty called AppleCare+ for $99 for their devices. I have used it before on my iPad and my wife's iPhone. It is amazing and they cover everything. On imore.com which is an apple site, the forums have lots of people saying they choose Squaretrade over AppleCare.
That is just an example, again I have not used them so I am just sharing what I have read.
But I have used Best Buy coverage, AT&T insurance, and Sprint insurance. Best Buy was horrible in all ways as was Sprint. Both grilled you with tons of questions, and honestly looked for ways to void your warranty. Sprint even called a huge bright white spot on the middle of my HTC EVO a cosmetic problem. Both AT&T and Sprint use Asurian as the insurance company, and both times I have had to swap phones they gave me damaged models. With Sprint I went through about 4 Palm Pres before getting one that wasn't noticeably damaged. ATT swapped my Atrix out without any hassle but the first one was damaged as well.
I could be biased bc of my experiences but remember they are not in business to help you, they are in business to make money. Do the math to see if it is worth it. I will say that I have used it before for the first 2-4 months when a device is first released bc of the high cost. Normally the out of contract cost drops after a month or two.
Good luck.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thank you Bro.
I've done some research on both.
Before I was under the impression they give you a brand new phone, but it seems a Refurbished one is the way to go for them.
It appears to me that after: $199 + $100 it is not worth it to get a refurbished phone after let's say 12 months of usage. One may just use this money and do an early upgrade if anything goes wrong with the phone.
BTW squaretrade doesn't allow theft coverage.
You don't always get a refurbished... I was given a brand new device once.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I317 using Tapatalk 2
The Librarian of Congress decided in October 2012 that unlocking of cell phones would be removed from the exceptions to the DMCA.
As of January 26, consumers will no longer be able unlock their phones for use on a different network without carrier permission, even after their contract has expired.
Consumers will be forced to pay exorbitant roaming fees to make calls while traveling abroad. It reduces consumer choice, and decreases the resale value of devices that consumers have paid for in full.
The Librarian noted that carriers are offering more unlocked phones at present, but the great majority of phones sold are still locked.
We ask that the White House ask the Librarian of Congress to rescind this decision, and failing that, champion a bill that makes unlocking permanently legal.
https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/make-unlocking-cell-phones-legal/1g9KhZG7
I believe this only applies to new phones.. and you have 90 days from the date of the law to unlock your phone without any penalties.
page 16 of the docket: https://s3.amazonaws.com/public-inspection.federalregister.gov/2012-26308.pdf
so most of us are okay. but it sucks for people buying new phones. Might be okay on used phones, but I haven't gotten to that part yet.
chances are they'll revise the law in 2 years.
Seeing as T-Mobile is doing away with subsidized phones and the other carriers will probably follow suit much the same as international markets then one would no longer have a need to lock into a2 year contract unless of course there are to be plan discounts. That said there should be no reason for a carrier to refuse to unlock a phone that a consumer is now paying full price for, which is pushing $600 to $700 for the newest high end models.
I certainly don't agree that we should be paying upwards of $700 for something that has a realistic life span of 2 years, i would expect a laptop of the same price to last 5+. However i do agree that if you purchased a phone at a lower subsidized price and signed a two year contract then no you should not be able to Sim unlock it. Now if you pay your early term fees and are clear of your contact them there should be no reason for a carrier to deny unlocking said device.
If you are a person that travels abroad and need an unlocked phone them you should take that into consideration at time of purchase or contact the carrier to deal with it then.
Sent from my SGH-T989 using xda premium
I'm not sure but can this be posted in other threads without getting in trouble so we can make everyone know about this situation?
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-T989 using xda premium
blakdrew said:
I'm not sure but can this be posted in other threads without getting in trouble so we can make everyone know about this situation?
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-T989 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't see why not...but whats the point? Everyone should know about this by now, its been mentioned on various websites all over the internet.
Also, no offense to the OP but this petition is pretty useless, I mean, we all know how good petitions (ones pertaining to mobile phones) have worked before. Companies don't pay attention to it, so I doubt Congress will. The whole issue is redundant seeing as whoever wants to unlock their phone, will end up unlocking it, whatever the law may be. Its not like the government will set up random checkpoints to take your phone and make sure its not unlocked. People are just over reacting like they usually do. Its been illegal to download music and movies for a few years now and that doesn't seem to stop the people doing it. The only thing I see the this law harming are the various websites and ebay auctions that make money from unlocking phones. The truth is compared to the old Nokia days, smart phones(some, not all) are pretty easy to unlock.
One of the provisions is if you buy a phone from a 3rd party youre exempt.
My opinion? Its a sad day in this country when you dont have complete ownership of some you purchase.
Today its phones, tomorrow its......?
blackangst said:
My opinion? Its a sad day in this country when you dont have complete ownership of some you purchase.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I know. Even the cell phone industry (CTIA) basically admitted in its arguments to the Library of Congress that the reason they want this is purely in order to protect their business model (based on subsidies) and has nothing to do with copyright. It's bizarre to claim that it can possibly be a violation of copyright to use a physical device that you fully own the way you want. And it's pathetic that the U.S. is so far behind the rest of the world in terms of having a rational competitive wireless market.
Again the last two posts even though they stated the point they missed it. The carriers offer phones at a subsidised price to get subscribers to sign two year contracts not because they want to give you a good deal but because they want you to use and pay for their services fort that time. Prior to this law anyone could go and purchase a phone at a lower price and a month later decide to jump ship, sim unlock their phone and go to another carrier or worse stay with said carrier and sell the new phone for a profit. I could feasibly add a line to my account for an extra $5 a month which comes to $120 over two years, get a $600 phone for around $200 sim unlock it and sell it on eBay at the $600 price. That's a $280 profit in my pocket.
So the carriers shouldn't protect themselves from this type of activity.
Don't get me wrong i think all the carriers rape their customers every chance they get and i don't agree with 95% percent of what they do but trying to petition Congress over this is totally dumb. Maybe petition Congress to get reasonable cell phone pricing. Or how about the fact that i pay the same rate in an area with sketchy service as a person that live in Seattle and had great service.
Sent from my SGH-T989 using xda premium
yeah, but all carriers have ETF's (Early Termination Fees) that you have to pay if you jump ship before fulfilling your contract. That should take care of the subsidized cost of the phone.
mike-y said:
yeah, but all carriers have ETF's (Early Termination Fees) that you have to pay if you jump ship before fulfilling your contract. That should take care of the subsidized cost of the phone.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes if those fees actually get paid. Or most likely someone who is being shady in the first place will just let those fees go to collection and later written off in bankruptcy or simply forgotten about for years and years.
Take me for example, i got my phone for $99 (2 of them actually) and i am very unhappy with T-Mobile but still have 18 months on my contract well my thought is to unlock the phone, jump ship, and worry about the early term fees at a later date which by the way wouldn't be in my name anyway. So really if i break up with my girlfriend then I'm not responsible and i just made a $400 profit. Now i have two reasons not to do all that 1I'm not a shady person and 2 its now illegal.
My point is that all one needs to do is ask the carrier to unlock the phone and if there are no contact obligations then the carrier has no reason not to. The only ones that should have issue are those trying to be shady.
Sent from my SGH-T989 using xda premium
explodingboy70 said:
Again the last two posts even though they stated the point they missed it. The carriers offer phones at a subsidised price to get subscribers to sign two year contracts not because they want to give you a good deal but because they want you to use and pay for their services fort that time. Prior to this law anyone could go and purchase a phone at a lower price and a month later decide to jump ship, sim unlock their phone and go to another carrier or worse stay with said carrier and sell the new phone for a profit. I could feasibly add a line to my account for an extra $5 a month which comes to $120 over two years, get a $600 phone for around $200 sim unlock it and sell it on eBay at the $600 price. That's a $280 profit in my pocket.
So the carriers shouldn't protect themselves from this type of activity.
Don't get me wrong i think all the carriers rape their customers every chance they get and i don't agree with 95% percent of what they do but trying to petition Congress over this is totally dumb. Maybe petition Congress to get reasonable cell phone pricing. Or how about the fact that i pay the same rate in an area with sketchy service as a person that live in Seattle and had great service.
Sent from my SGH-T989 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
explodingboy70 said:
Yes if those fees actually get paid. Or most likely someone who is being shady in the first place will just let those fees go to collection and later written off in bankruptcy or simply forgotten about for years and years.
Take me for example, i got my phone for $99 (2 of them actually) and i am very unhappy with T-Mobile but still have 18 months on my contract well my thought is to unlock the phone, jump ship, and worry about the early term fees at a later date which by the way wouldn't be in my name anyway. So really if i break up with my girlfriend then I'm not responsible and i just made a $400 profit. Now i have two reasons not to do all that 1I'm not a shady person and 2 its now illegal.
My point is that all one needs to do is ask the carrier to unlock the phone and if there are no contact obligations then the carrier has no reason not to. The only ones that should have issue are those trying to be shady.
Sent from my SGH-T989 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No, sir, I believe YOU are missing the point if you honestly believe this is about carriers trying to recoup their $$$ from subsidized phones. Seriously? NOTHING in the bill states carriers can unlock phones after a contract is fulfilled, or that they have to. Therefore, after said contract is fulfilled, you STILL own a device you dont have control over.
Do you own a house? Do you have a mortgage? If so, you know that just by paying off the mortgage it doesnt give you any more property ownership rights that you didnt have when you signed the mortgage. Once you've signed it, you legally own it, even though you still owe money on it. Until this overreaching law took effect, it was that way for phones (for the most part).
explodingboy70 said:
Again the last two posts even though they stated the point they missed it. The carriers offer phones at a subsidised price to get subscribers to sign two year contracts not because they want to give you a good deal but because they want you to use and pay for their services fort that time. Prior to this law anyone could go and purchase a phone at a lower price and a month later decide to jump ship, sim unlock their phone and go to another carrier or worse stay with said carrier and sell the new phone for a profit. I could feasibly add a line to my account for an extra $5 a month which comes to $120 over two years, get a $600 phone for around $200 sim unlock it and sell it on eBay at the $600 price. That's a $280 profit in my pocket.
So the carriers shouldn't protect themselves from this type of activity.
Don't get me wrong i think all the carriers rape their customers every chance they get and i don't agree with 95% percent of what they do but trying to petition Congress over this is totally dumb. Maybe petition Congress to get reasonable cell phone pricing. Or how about the fact that i pay the same rate in an area with sketchy service as a person that live in Seattle and had great service.
Sent from my SGH-T989 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You forgot an important point in your comment. YOU HAVE TO PAY 20-30USD PER MONTH FOR DATA! Therefore, your cost of adding a line is 120$+20x12=360$. So the profit is not as great as you mentioned.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-T989 using xda app-developers app
What's next? Putting restrictions on oxygen?
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-T989 using xda premium
Signed and reposted on Hackforums.
http://www.hackforums.net/showthread.php?tid=3226550
Hope you don't mind.
I linked this thread, and quoted the contents of the OP.
Figure it'd be good to get it out to a broader audience.
45,000 more signatures needed.
Go ahead and put my name on it. I'm too lazy to register, and I don't want a bunch of new e-mails trying to get me sign a bunch of other petitions.
And to the debate: Use an Obama phone, Save your money, and BUY a phone outright. The faster they see that this hurts the big TWO (AT&T, Verizon), it will change.
If you're impatient and want a phone NOW, understand the consequences. You are licensing that phone, and may never own it. And you'll also be advertising for whatever company you go with.
Yes, I know I'm advertising for T-Mobile in my signature. That's because I think they are honest, and very beneficial to the XDA community.
explodingboy70 said:
Again the last two posts even though they stated the point they missed it. The carriers offer phones at a subsidized price to get subscribers to sign two year contracts not because they want to give you a good deal but because they want you to use and pay for their services fort that time. Prior to this law anyone could go and purchase a phone at a lower price and a month later decide to jump ship, sim unlock their phone and go to another carrier or worse stay with said carrier and sell the new phone for a profit. I could feasibly add a line to my account for an extra $5 a month which comes to $120 over two years, get a $600 phone for around $200 sim unlock it and sell it on eBay at the $600 price. That's a $280 profit in my pocket.
So the carriers shouldn't protect themselves from this type of activity.
Don't get me wrong i think all the carriers rape their customers every chance they get and i don't agree with 95% percent of what they do but trying to petition Congress over this is totally dumb. Maybe petition Congress to get reasonable cell phone pricing. Or how about the fact that i pay the same rate in an area with sketchy service as a person that live in Seattle and had great service.
Sent from my SGH-T989 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
WELL SAID! BRAVO! This I would support as well as many others!
I have been on this side of things for a long time! I used to live in Seattle, had Sprint and Verizon because ATT and T-Mobile are both very sketchy up there, Verizon is top dawg and since Sprint uses Verizon's towers and is cheaper than anyone else, you get the best phones (imo) and best value, not to mention unlimited data.
That being said, I recently moved to Dallas, and Sprint/Verizon down here are really terrible! I mean Seattle, West Seattle I was pulling upwards of 70mb down and 50-60's up, ridiculous speeds, but made it a lot better when you paid your bill because you felt like you were getting something! Down in Dallas I never saw it go past 10-15mb. Not to mention my signal bars never reached full unless I was under a tower.
Tmobile, my current provider (only for another week or so) is just terrible everywhere. Best I have seen them anywhere is 6-10mb, and I'm sorry but they claim to have better call quality than ATT now, which is horse$hit! Dropped calls, taking over a minute just to start dialing, and when you do talk, lets just say its not good.
I just think that payment plans should be based on where you are at in their coverage area. (If you leave state/town for a trip that's on you). That's like car companies making you pay retail price for a used car same as a new one! Would you do it?
I hope you guys know they unlocking your device is legal. What's illegal is buying an unlock code from online sources. You can no longer just go online and pay a small fee (like $10) for the unlock code. You can call your service provider (T-Mobile as an example) and ask them for the code. (They shouldn't have a problem giving it to you.) Another way of legally unlocking your device is by doing a method like the one in this thread:
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=2024514
Or you could have someone that knows coding and have then do it for you. (As long as it is not through an online coding site you are good.)
Source: T-Mobile employee and target mobile employee.
----------------------------------------------
I'm full of great idea's, but don't have the time to create them or learn the coding to create them. If you want to make one of my ideas a reality just message me and I will give you my idea as specific as possible.
ideas:
Spoiler
-launcher/lock screen
-line rider type game where you control the character
-2d fighting game like art of fighting for the SNES
-multiplayer fps where you create your own map with a creative mode (minecraft style)
-roller coaster tycoon style game
-many more!
Just message me which idea you want info on and I'll tell you!
----------------------------------------------
Well said Ariana....
Service provider must ... unlock the device at any time and at no charge.
At least that's what the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC) is recommending.
It's warm day in February when I have something good to say about the CRTC but they do finally appear to cracking down on service provider fees, lengthy contracts, and cell phone locking.
I mention this because the title of this thread sounds like the opposite of ongoing discussions in Canada about how North American consumers are paying more than cell phone customers the world over.
More information by search for "Buyer's remorse" and CBC or go to the Canadian governments CRTC website to download a full pdf of current proposal.
(I'd give you the links, but I'm newly registered here
Last year I sold my Samsung S1 watch back to Best Buy using their Insurance program, then I used that money to buy a Nintendo Switch. I didn't know I was able to do this, and it was the customer service rep who told me about this option. The device has to be able to turn on and somewhat function in order to take advantage of this feature of "insurance", was the only thing they told me was needed. Benefit? You can constantly keep updated with the latest tech with spending little extra money. You get back (at time of purchase, so if there is a price drop, it doesn't count towards/affect your return) the price of the insurance, device and any tax in the form of in-store credit. Making insurance kind of worth it, for that alone. I don't know how many people know of this trick but it's kind of a handy feature and if you're like me and need the best and newest tech as it comes out, then kind of makes that initial buy-in worth it. Also, don't forget to abuse their Amazon price matching feature, it's how I got the Tab S3 for $100 off and the keyboard for nearly 50% off.
Few things to note about amazon price matching: 1) Has to be shipped and sold by Amazon, 2) if you're buying the insurance for the product, the insurance pricing-tier will match what the original store price was. In the case of the Tab S3 they had it for $550, which pushes it up to the $150/2yr insurance price, where if it were at the $450 I was buying it for due to price-matching, it would have been about $100.
Some fun tips and tricks I thought I'd like to share with you guys. Especially those who want this tablet but are waiting for the 256GB version since Best Buy in Chicago seemed to have alluded to it being released at an unknown but later date. You can do just that. I don't know if that's how insurance works across the board, but I definitely know that's how Best Buy has it set up.
I am familiar with most best buy features ad tricks, but idea what you are talking about here? can you provide a link to this "insurance" with details?
sounds scammy and scummy to me and a way to raise insurance prices because of abuse. i don't think xda is the place for these types of posts either.
yourmumsbootloader said:
sounds scammy and scummy to me and a way to raise insurance prices because of abuse. i don't think xda is the place for these types of posts either.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Says the newbie that joined today lol.
Sent from my SM-N960U1 using Tapatalk
yourmumsbootloader said:
sounds scammy and scummy to me and a way to raise insurance prices because of abuse. i don't think xda is the place for these types of posts either.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If it's a legitimate service offered by Best Buy, WHY would it not be ok to discuss? As for taking advantage of BestBuy... oh please give me a break, every sale, every markup/down, their price match, their ADH insurance, hell their 99 dollar HDMI cables, are all there to scam their customers out of whatever dollars they can get. If you can turn one of these scams to your advantage and make them honor their blatant false and misleading advertising, MORE POWER TO YOU!!!
I get pretty much every thing from Best Buy making them honor their price match, and still am told regularly, "oh that's too cheap I won't honor that" even if it's from one of their "Key Online Competitors"
But still know nothing about any price guarantee insurance, unless the OP is talking about ADH insurance that gets "broken" when a new model comes out? People have been doing that for years, which is why best Buy almost never actually honors their ADH insurance.
yourmumsbootloader said:
sounds scammy and scummy to me and a way to raise insurance prices because of abuse. i don't think xda is the place for these types of posts either.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's not, it's a trade in feature. Also, I don't know how you'd abuse it. Since you have to re-buy the insurance. So if you buy this insurance plan let's make numbers up: 600 for a tablet, 100 for insurance, = 700, yet when you trade-in with their program you only get the 600 and tax back in store credit. So you're out the insurance money. Though, the Tab S5 comes out, you can buy it outright, most likely even though the Tab S4 is now going for 450. You can get the 660 (since tax by me is 10%) back to pay for the S5, and then pay the 100 for the insurance. That's how the program works, not a hugely gameable program, just a feature that people don't realise when they buy a two year plan at best buy. Hence me bringing it up.
https://www.bestbuy.com/usw/termsconditions/anonymous
There is the link it's their "Buy back feature" the device has to be running and in decent condition. You can't bring a broken tablet in and expect them to go along with it, or a tablet with a cracked screen either.
dcoke said:
It's not, it's a trade in feature. Also, I don't know how you'd abuse it. Since you have to re-buy the insurance. So if you buy this insurance plan let's make numbers up: 600 for a tablet, 100 for insurance, = 700, yet when you trade-in with their program you only get the 600 and tax back in store credit. So you're out the insurance money. Though, the Tab S5 comes out, you can buy it outright, most likely even though the Tab S4 is now going for 450. You can get the 660 (since tax by me is 10%) back to pay for the S5, and then pay the 100 for the insurance. That's how the program works, not a hugely gameable program, just a feature that people don't realise when they buy a two year plan at best buy. Hence me bringing it up.
https://www.bestbuy.com/usw/termsconditions/anonymous
There is the link it's their "Buy back feature" the device has to be running and in decent condition. You can't bring a broken tablet in and expect them to go along with it, or a tablet with a cracked screen either.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
obviously I'm looking at the wrong plan. Looking at the Buy Back plan, if you return in the first 6 months you get "up to" 50% of purchase price back. That's worthless especially if you're paying them for the plan on top. Any tablet or computer that less than 6 months old you can sell for well over 50% of purchase price.
gottahavit said:
obviously I'm looking at the wrong plan. Looking at the Buy Back plan, if you return in the first 6 months you get "up to" 50% of purchase price back. That's worthless especially if you're paying them for the plan on top. Any tablet or computer that less than 6 months old you can sell for well over 50% of purchase price.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes, I've been told the same thing, and YES, it is up to each person how they feel about using or abusing the "warranty". First, it is pertaining to the Accidental Best Buy warranty that covers anything. It has been suggested quietly by a Best Buy employee that you could "accidentally" drop, sit on, crack screen, etc. shortly before the warranty period expires, and because of the Accidental warranty that covers everything you could trade in the device for credit of the value you paid for it. To me, it is definitely abusing the system if you intentionally break your device just to use the warranty.
Second, you are correct that it is not a trade-in for like value. The device has to be damaged just like any warranty claim. So, if you intentionally break the device, you are not taking advantage of the policy, you are abusing it.
Also, using the Amazon price-match isn't really a hack, since they give absolutely zero hassle on the price match. The only thing it has to say is "Fulfilled by Amazon". It doesn't have to be sold by them, as long as the seller stocks the item in an Amazon Warehouse and Amazon fulfills it.
NoFaQ said:
Yes, I've been told the same thing, and YES, it is up to each person how they feel about using or abusing the "warranty". First, it is pertaining to the Accidental Best Buy warranty that covers anything. It has been suggested quietly by a Best Buy employee that you could "accidentally" drop, sit on, crack screen, etc. shortly before the warranty period expires, and because of the Accidental warranty that covers everything you could trade in the device for credit of the value you paid for it. To me, it is definitely abusing the system if you intentionally break your device just to use the warranty.
Second, you are correct that it is not a trade-in for like value. The device has to be damaged just like any warranty claim. So, if you intentionally break the device, you are not taking advantage of the policy, you are abusing it.
Also, using the Amazon price-match isn't really a hack, since they give absolutely zero hassle on the price match. The only thing it has to say is "Fulfilled by Amazon". It doesn't have to be sold by them, as long as the seller stocks the item in an Amazon Warehouse and Amazon fulfills it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ok yes if we are talking the accidental damage plans and not the trade in program then yes this has been something people have been using/abusing(often failing) for years. You can pay 30% for a warranty which if you are hard on your toys might be worth, but as a "trade up" program on a tablet I would not recommend. Best buy still sells New Tab S2s 4+ years after release so the odds that they will give you your money back vs just giving you another tab s2 or more likely a refurb are pretty slim. The same is true for the S3 too and I'm sure will be true for the s4. Now the same math is not true for TVs and certain other tech and it is possible to make out with this plan. That said Best Buy often will not give money back in that instance and offer you a TV "like" yours that is much cheaper.
What I strongly recommend people do "take advantage" of is Best Buys Price match. It is fairly easy to get them to price match lots of stuff from lots of online stores. I generally save 20-50% on almost everything I buy, just by doing a little searching and making them honor their policy. That said I did pay near retail for this tab as I "really" wanted it and no one was discounting, but paid only 30 dollars for my book cover.
gottahavit said:
Ok yes if we are talking the accidental damage plans and not the trade in program then yes this has been something people have been using/abusing(often failing) for years. You can pay 30% for a warranty which if you are hard on your toys might be worth, but as a "trade up" program on a tablet I would not recommend. Best buy still sells New Tab S2s 4+ years after release so the odds that they will give you your money back vs just giving you another tab s2 or more likely a refurb are pretty slim. The same is true for the S3 too and I'm sure will be true for the s4. Now the same math is not true for TVs and certain other tech and it is possible to make out with this plan. That said Best Buy often will not give money back in that instance and offer you a TV "like" yours that is much cheaper.
What I strongly recommend people do "take advantage" of is Best Buys Price match. It is fairly easy to get them to price match lots of stuff from lots of online stores. I generally save 20-50% on almost everything I buy, just by doing a little searching and making them honor their policy. That said I did pay near retail for this tab as I "really" wanted it and no one was discounting, but paid only 30 dollars for my book cover.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree that the price matching is pretty hassle free. The managers actually have a lot of empowerment to make decisions outside the normal price matching, too. I got Best Buy to price match a Surface Pro 4 with the Microsoft student price deal. I was just honest and asked if they would price match it, since I would rather buy their accidental protection plan, and I was going to buy the computer one way or another. Either Best Buy or Microsoft store. The manager accepted the price match, no problem.
NoFaQ said:
Yes, I've been told the same thing, and YES, it is up to each person how they feel about using or abusing the "warranty". First, it is pertaining to the Accidental Best Buy warranty that covers anything. It has been suggested quietly by a Best Buy employee that you could "accidentally" drop, sit on, crack screen, etc. shortly before the warranty period expires, and because of the Accidental warranty that covers everything you could trade in the device for credit of the value you paid for it. To me, it is definitely abusing the system if you intentionally break your device just to use the warranty.
Second, you are correct that it is not a trade-in for like value. The device has to be damaged just like any warranty claim. So, if you intentionally break the device, you are not taking advantage of the policy, you are abusing it.
Also, using the Amazon price-match isn't really a hack, since they give absolutely zero hassle on the price match. The only thing it has to say is "Fulfilled by Amazon". It doesn't have to be sold by them, as long as the seller stocks the item in an Amazon Warehouse and Amazon fulfills it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The device doesn't have to be broken to take advantage of the Geek Squad Protection plan is what they call it by me, and I think the trade in is only offered on the 2+ year plans. So the 1 year plan doesn't offer it and then you'd have to buy the trade-in feature, since I never bought the trade in feature on its own. I just always opted for the 2 years. I did it first with my Gear S2 watch, it was 100% working, looked brand new just due to its age, battery couldn't hold a charge. They don't heavily advertise it since by the time the next generation of device comes out, they're out money since the last gen usually drops 100 dollars less, and they'd probably get maybe half of that price back from parts or Samsung alone. I think it's that reason they don't heavily advertise it and it's kind of a "secret menu" item.
Limeybastard said:
Says the newbie that joined today lol.
Sent from my SM-N960U1 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This, coming from the guy who's only been here 5 years.
raduque said:
This, coming from the guy who's only been here 5 years.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
11 years... Pleb.
Yeah, so all on all that Best Buy feature may work in certain scenarios for certain products.
Sent from my SM-N960U1 using Tapatalk
This is great info. Going to try this. Thanks!