SIM cards for Freerunner (was Free Runner price vs iphone 3G price)
higleylh at gmail.com
Thu Jun 12 03:02:56 CEST 2008
On Wed, Jun 11, 2008 at 4:35 PM, Joe Pfeiffer <joseph at pfeifferfamily.net>
> Kevin Dean writes:
> >On Wed, Jun 11, 2008 at 3:33 PM, Joe Pfeiffer <joseph at pfeifferfamily.net>
> >> US. To me, it's quite obvious that a contract without a phone
> >> *should* be cheaper, but that's a long way from "is" (it actually
> >> worked out for the best, since I've had a working phne all these
> >> months as a result).
> >I'm an American and your statement confuses me. Why is it "obvious"
> >that a contract without a phone should be cheaper? The service
> >(cellular connectivity for voice and/or data) is the same service no
> >matter what phone you have.
> Because the price of the "free" phone is bundled into the price of the
> contract. If I don't get a phone, I shouldn't have to pay for one.
> >In the US, the price of service contracts doesn't change. The price of
> >PHONES does when you agree to commit to a service contract but the
> >service contract doesn't.
> >>>The most obvious example of this is that one can choose how much to
> >>>pay up front - on can choose the phone "for free" with one set of
> >>>tariffs, or pay £75 on purchase and get the same number of minutes
> >>>for £10 a month less (on an 18-month contract, for example). One can
> >>>also get much cheaper contracts when no phone purchase is involved.
> >Not sure if you're confusing cause and effect here or if Brits just
> >look at "cellular service" differently than Americans. You are
> >implying that "the contract" is "the monthly service of voice/data
> >connectivity and a handset". In the US, ONLY the monthly service of
> >voice/data connectivity is contracted. It seems to me that what you're
> >ACTUALLY doing when you make your purchase is purchasing a phone at
> >some price, agreeing to a service level (monthly voice/data) and then
> >financing the cost of that device through your monthly bill. By paying
> >the £75 up front you're simply paying for the phone and NOT paying the
> >cost of it in installments monthly.
> >But from how I see it the service that is purchased (voice/data
> >connectivity) remains the same price.
> Not quite -- you're also committed to pay the inflated price long
> enough to pay for the phone, or pay for the phone under the guise of
> an "early termination" fee.
> Openmoko community mailing list
> community at lists.openmoko.org
If I make an observation.. I am an American by birth but have lived all over
the world.. In the middle of the Pacific, Korea, and now Europe (again).
One of the things I have noticed is that the laws in Europe tend to protect
the consumer whereas the laws in the US tend to protect big business. I
could give many examples but I think this whole "contact vs. no contract"
discussion is a perfect example. imho.
Just a personal observation... shoot me down if you like.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the community