FCC to look at exclusive cell phone deals

[Rabid_Gypsy]

Originally Posted by robertrulez

I would love an iphone on Sprint, that would be amazing! Probably the best phone in the US.

Why not ditch Sprint and go to AT&T then? The iphone doesn't really count any more as most GSM carriers have it now, but when it came out, AT&T gained a lot of customers. Why does the government want to stop businesses from making money on marketing a product?

[TheRealHotshot]

Originally Posted by Rabid_Gypsy

Why not ditch Sprint and go to AT&T then? The iphone doesn't really count any more as most GSM carriers have it now, but when it came out, AT&T gained a lot of customers. Why does the government want to stop businesses from making money on marketing a product?

I was wondering the SAME thing myself.

[racemepls]

This really is bs. Even if the tp2(which i intend on getting) was exclusive to tmobile, I would not view this subject any different. The goverment NEEDS to stay out of the business aspect as much as they seperate themselves from religion. If you make it that everyone should be able to sell an iphone then what your saying is microsoft and palm can make an iphone too. hey why doesnt nintendo make an xbox. company's only make these products so they can create agreements to have a advantage on the competition. if this didnt exist we would never see this technology

[Sgabert]

Bunch of Republicans in here. I think 6 month exclusivity is plenty. Actually, it would be best if the US had a mobile phone system like much of Asia, where phones are sold mostly without contract at a higher price then the customer chooses the carrier. This would foster more market growth because the carrier with the best network would get more business, instead of getting business based on the phone selection. I understand this would not work quite as well in the US because of the CDMA and GSM split, but by carriers having only certain phones I can imagine that manufactures are being hit because they have a smaller consumer base (being that most people probably wouldn't switch carriers). The providers also are being hurt because other companies come out with phones they are not able to offer because of exclusivity agreements, so they try to sign more agreements and the other companies try to sign more agreements and it turns into this big cuthroat spiral because customers are not coming to providers for service, they are coming to them for the phones they offer. Wutev, just my $.02

[robertrulez]

Originally Posted by Not_A_Stain

I was wondering the SAME thing myself.

first its ATT

second its way too expensive

im a high school student on a limited allowance, I can't afford it

[mbaseball3]

Originally Posted by Sgabert

Bunch of Republicans in here.

and you must be an obama democrat for that statement. hey if we're gonna bring in political differences in here ill state I am a repub and am fine with the idea of the higher ups limiting exclusivity for an allotted amount of time. in this fast and ever changing changing world of phones and technology bandwagoneers are running rampant! how many millions went to att just for the Iphone not knowing squat if it were gonna be limited to att or not? the same concept would happen even if tmo were to be exclusive to the tp2 or not. no one is gonna wait a year for the tp2 to be released from tmo and find its way to another carrier! you know why? cause by years end tp3 or another phone of equal or better technology will be out. the stragglers will pick it up on another company when its released from it exclusivity rights but it'll be old news.
another iphone example; how many iphone models have come out? 4 I think? maybe its 3 I don't remember, but the first gen Iphone is old news to the 3g s that's coming out. now if att only had rights for 1st year (about when 2nd gen came out) then another company would have at least had an opportunity to get the iphone. how many ppl would have left att just to get 2nd iphone? ppl are gonna follow the new crave! a decade of rights is just dumb. but its a 50/50 game. its right and its not right. im still just seeing it as a bad business move for apple. how many more customers would they have if they weren't stuck with one carrier. im down with carrier bidding. if say att were to always when well so be it. equal opportunity was given to those other carriers.

[pgr73]

6 months is no where near long enough. And that's not politics, that's business. Apple may be fronted by Hippy Liberals, but the bottom line is they are beholden to there investors to be profitable 1st, inovative 2nd.

Also, how much is AT&T paying per iPhone?

Say they are paying $600 for the 8GB 3g, selling them for $99 with an $80 plan, how long until they turn a profit? Lets say AT&T's cost on that plan averages $40, than it would take 13 months to break even, leaving 11 months to profit $40 a month after a huge front end investment. They literally need you to NOT upgrade for at least 12 months to truly be profitable. That may be the reason they didn't go ape **** on there 3GS changes. Make it cool enough for the 2G hangers-on to buy it and go for another 2 years, but the same enough to make the 3G crowd go another year to see what Apple will do next year, and so on.

Also, maybe Sprint and Verizon aren't willing to take risk on those margins. Bottom line is money talks.

As far as going to an Asian style market, it would cost Apple a net $0 to make the iphone GSM/CDMA, selling it for $600 would be the issue. After the fanboys buy up the first shipment, who is shelling out that kind of dough? In our "Live for Today, Pay for it Tommorow" economy it would be a tough sell and $99 is easier to swallow. And for those who think rate plans would drop if they went this way, I doubt it.

[Vertigo]

I really don't see why people get so uptight when they see the government trying to help the customer... IMO what ATT has with the Iphone is monopoly, I don't get why I have to pay $130 a month to have an Iphone when I can pay $50 for more and better services that ATT can offer..

pgr73: I don't know where you get you numbers from... ATT pays around 300 per Iphone if not less, and where do you get the $40 plan? to start you need a data package is that's only $30.00 to start... keep adding..

[twistedfish]

Originally Posted by Snoman002

Personally I don't think I agree with the Gov stepping in and trying to control a deal between two companies, unless such deal creates a monolopy which the iPhone does not.

Don't forget that the government is already involved in the control of cell phones. There are phones in other countries that we can't get here in the US because of the FCC not approving them. I would rather see the FCC stop handicapping phones because they deem that the consumers don't "need" features (higher megapixel cameras for example) than I would see them regulate more of which phones can be used with which carriers.

I would love to be able to use any phone on any carrier but that is probably never going to happen (not just because of the technology). If you look at other market places you see consumer "herding" i.e. the car industry. There are a ton of features that are exclusive to anyone car manufacturer, their hope is that you will want that feature enough to buy their product...that is exactly what they are doing with phones. This also drives carriers and phone vendors to be more competitive so that they produce a product that one ups the other guys (at least that is the hope!).

Anyway, time to put my soap box away. Just my opinion and like most things that happen with our government my opinion will die right here on this screen.

[ajac]

I rather buy the phone and shop for for a provider. Make the phones at cost then shop for a carrier and life would be good.